I really hope that what you say is true Craig but still...

If it was only a matter of being an MVP that would be fine. I mean you guys receive the recognition from MS once a year as long as you deserve it and that's it. Nothing more attached to it.

But because you guys also:

- Receive MSDN Universal
- Get to attend meeting with the big suits at MS (Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, Ken Levy...)
- And whatever else is given to MVPs

this is where some persons could see a possible conflict of interest. I imagine that for some this could represent a big incentive to do more just to be sure to be on the right side of MS suits and keep getting the freebies.

Doing more could be to always be there to say that product XYZ is wonderfull. In short be the perfect yes-men.

So that probably explains the questions.

By the way I think that MVPs really deserve all the things they get from MS for all of the people they help.


>Mike, I totally agree with you on this one. I've sat in meetings at Microsoft with hundreds of other MVPs listening to Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, Jim Alchin, and other senior Microsoft execs and I can tell you that Microsoft got a good lecture on where they've done things poorly.
>
>Being an MVP in no way obligates someone to do anything Microsoft wants or says. I guarantee that I've felt no pressure to say things and have never been told what to say.
>
>>
>>If it was Microsoft's intention to turn people into puppets by giving them MVP awards, they certainly failed! LOL Some of the toughest questions and pressure they get comes from MVPs. The program is to recognize those who go beyond the call in providing free peer support for various Microsoft products. If MS has an ulterior motive, it is to save money by letting the user community provide most support so they don't have to pay $$ for MS employees to do that (as was the case until about 10 years ago).
>>
>>Mike (6 time MVP)