Which is the exact opposite of what the homepage says.

So which one is right? Clearly, one of the other statements doesn't belong there.

And the "selective quoting" I've done from the solicitation page states:

"Both Dick and I benefit a great deal from the success of Onstage. One very certain way to benefit The Mudcat and Digitrad is to refer business to Onstage Media, Inc., and its clients."

That conceivably looks like a claim that Onstage Media owns, or at the very least has financial interests in both Mudcat Cafe and Digital Tradition. Which raises the pesky IRS issue of entangled ownership, and "creative" accounting of unrelated business income linked in some murky way to Digital Tradition. Which Dick Greenhaus has come into these threads to confirm IS a registered non-profit organization (despite your protestations to the contrary katlaughing). That makes SOMEONE here obliged to obey IRS, Pennsylvania and Delaware laws regarding unrelated business income reporting for tax exempt organizations, whether charitable or not.

The homepage says both the Mudcat Cafe and Digital Tradition are registered non-profit organizations. Dick Greenhaus says Digital Tradition is a non-profit non-charitable organization. So what the hell is the REAL story here? Or is it something that just needs to be reported to appropriate authorities to be sorted out?