>>>>
>>>>I understand that the very root of the issue was Naomi's using a direct link to a UT thread in an answer on a forum that AndyK either owns or has strong influence.
>>>>Seemed that direct links to elsewhere were fine, but not to the UT.
>>>>
>>>>From that little snowflake of a problem an avalanche ensued.
>>>
>>>Jim,
>>>
>>>That is my impression too.
>>>
>>>Don't have any links to foxite as I'm not using it
>>>But for msdn - see here
>>>
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1552798&SiteID=1>>>and here
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1617290&SiteID=1>>
>>"Please do NOT refer to "for-profit" sites - like the Universal Thread - in replies on this forum."... says he on a Microsoft-run forum. Microsoft is obviously a well known non-profit.
>
>That's exactly how I reacted also, when I read that paragraph!
The official reaction of the supermoderators of the MSDN forum has been that it was not advertising. Also they don't mind advertisements if it's context relevant. MS saw no problem. That's what made Andy decide to jump out as moderator there.
Groet,
Peter de Valença
Constructive frustration is the breeding ground of genius.
If there’s no willingness to moderate for the sake of good debate, then I have no willingness to debate at all.
Let's develop superb standards that will end the holy wars.
"There are three types of people: Alphas and Betas", said the beta decisively.
If you find this message rude or offensive or stupid, please take a step away from the keyboard and try to think calmly about an eventual a possible alternative explanation of my message.
