"Strong inference" . . . you are not stating it correctly. Robert Brown said directly that there were major VFP developers doing exactly that. Yeah, there's one guy that has been backstabbing us for quite awhile and I'll be that he was one of those "major VFP developers." Thanks for reminding me that this is what some of the "gurus" were up to in private.

>>You have no idea what has been said in private by the gurus.
>SNIP
>
>Well we have at least a strong inference that some amongst the "gurus" pressed to have VFP killed earlier so that they could benefit from conversion business to .NET.
>
>We have a few "gurus" who declared right here that signing a simple petition was not their cup-of-tea, for reasons that betray more caution regarding Microsoft than "caring" for the product and its future.
>
>Many "gurus" repeated the Robert Green statement "if you haven't seen it in the last two releases then wake up and smell the coffee... it ain't gonna happen" when they could have continued pressing for things, as you did for improvements to the report writer.
>
>There is a wide cross-section of "gurus" and it has been evident to many of us, by virtue of antics similar to the above, that ***some*** of them were far more interested in protecting their connections/benefits with Microsoft than promoting and growing VFP. These have typically also been the most vocal in their positions.
>It is unfortunate that RussellC was so 'sweeping' in his statement. But I think it is undeniable that some (most?) "gurus" were - at least publically - extremely cautious in their statements and actions regarding Microsoft's handling of VFP. Believe it or not, these "gurus" had far more impact on the community (and its perception of Microsoft vis-a-vis VFP) than those who quietly persisted in pestering VFP Team members.