> Let nobody doubt the effects of the PA agitators any further. The intent and outcome of their passive-aggressive sniping has an obvious negative effect on this community.
>
>John, as someone who has spent time over the last year providing support on this forum, I take issue with that remark. As a matter of fact, yesterday I dropped what I was working on to help a UT member who was having an issue with Crystal Reports - this included troubleshooting his report/data via e-mail. I've done that several times over the last year.
>
>Yes, I've made statements and observations regarding Fox and .NET that resulted in agitation. In many instances I've responded to statements with which I disagreed, and provided counter-arguments. Some continue to want to remind me that this is a "Fox" forum - but it seems to me that a few want it both ways. They want to make any sweeping statement they wish about .NET, and they also don't want to hear news about FoxPro that isn't music to their ears. It's certainly not everyone, but it's definitely there.
>

This is true as far as I know. However, I do not see VFP developers frequenting the Dot NET forum to bring lost lambs back into the fold. Is it necessary to evangelize the need to convert to Dot NET to VFP developers on a regular basis? I guess you are just trying to save people from his/her own mistakes by not using the "correct technology".

>Someone believed that I said that certain folks are too old or too lazy to learn anything new. I never said that. I think that's more subtle manipulation via self-effacing humor. If someone wants to continue to use Fox and just doesn't care about anything else, fine, more power to them - it's when they make statements about .NET that are inaccurate or misleading that I'll jump in. This is, first and foremost, a technical forum, not a social catillion or a coffee house.
>
>Just to put things in perspective - go up to a newsgroup and make one inaccurate statement about .NET (or oracle, or whatever) and you will get your head taken off. I've seen industry leaders absolutely humiliate people for posting inaccurate informations/opinions.
>
>Oh, re: your Troll Alert idea - I think you're on shaky ground here, given the sequence of events:
>
>Claude stated a few weeks ago that he placed John Baird on the twit filter. As far as I can tell, it seems Claude removed it. I don't know that for a fact...but Claude responded directly to some of John's posts before anyone else did. So if I'm correct, that was mistake #1.
>
>Yes, John can be quite strong - but Claude had many options. He could have turned his twit filter back on. He could have ignored John. Or he could have responded in a way that didn't involve a physical threat (yes, I'm quite sure it was an empty threat), or a sexual innuendo (which couldn't have offended me less, I just thought it made him look bad). Given that Claude has provided ActiveVFP support on this forum, I would think he'd want to be especially careful about his posts, even when he was upset with someone. So that was mistake #2.
>
>I have absolutely no knowledge of what specific event(s) caused the ban, but Claude made his final post (where he really crossed the line) AFTER Martin gave both John and Claude pretty strong advice to put a cork in it, and specificially told Claude not to respond. Martin is normally a pretty diplomatic guy, so for him to turn it up a notch, that should have sent a clear signal. That was mistake #3, and that's specifically why I don't agree with your idea. Claude could have (and should have) stopped right there, and didn't, despite some pretty clear advice from a UT rep. (Someone actually believed it was possible that Claude didn't heed it because it wasn't obvious/clear what Martin was representing. I find it VERY hard to believe that a UT veteran wouldn't acknowledge Martin's role).
>
>Again, I hate to see this, but Claude brought this on himself. After JVP was banned, Claude directed some type of post to JVP (in abstentia), something along the lines of...I see you've been banned again, what was it this time? Well, fate shoots from the hip. It's unfortunate that someone who had provided services for the community has been banned (if indeed it's a ban). And while I certainly understand that many are upset by this, the facts don't allow me to agree with the idea that Claude was baited or provoked, and/or that he can claim victim status.
>
>And also, mistake #4 was circumventing his termination by continuing to post messages under someone else's account, which possibly harmed his chances for getting back in. (total speculation on my part)
>
>I have had no contact with Martin, Michel, or anyone representing the UT regarding Claude. If it were up to me (which it is NOT), I wouldn't have banned Claude, nor do I feel JVP should have been banned. I think when people break the rules the way Claude did, they should be suspended (a week, two weeks, month, whatever). But it's not up to me.
>
>I didn't post this to re-fuel an argument. Just wanted to set the record straight. I don't have much more to say on this, and no, this isn't a parthian shot. Just my 2 cents. ;)
>
>Kevin

Kevin;

The following comments are a perception that I have and nothing more.

There is a continuing pattern that you are engaged in and it seems to be your evangelical message to expound upon the virtues of Dot NET. Then John joins in and things get rough. It makes it seem like some sort of game. First you give the message in a rational tone and John comes to your defense with offensive actions. It makes it look like John is some kind of enforcer or protector for you.

Is it right for an individual to insult others on a continuing basis and then suddenly want to appear as a “good boy? Like take it to the edge and lets see how much I can aggravate someone and then I will be quiet. I think that John owns part of the problem.


I happen to use several software development tools, which include VFP and Dot NET. I know which forum to go to when I need help.

I appreciate your technical assistance to others as well as to myself. I would like to see the UT be more of a community and less like a shooting gallery! :)

Tom