Bottom line for me is that I wouldn't have to expect to get involved in a personal situation if I got nominated to a club like the MVPs (not that I wouldn't). So I don't necessarily expect others to also.

At a minimum though, I would not expect the Ks table to be all that crowded at the next MVP get-together.

>For example, it's apparant from Craig B's posts here that he's not a confrontational person on issues other then computer specific issues. I would find it unconfortable putting pressure on him for an announcement on this event.
>
>Perry,
>
>Craig has offered his opinion in the past on issues (for instance, JVP). What might be different here is that the issue involves "one of their own" (so to speak), as opposed to someone where there's been an adversarial history.
>
>Could it be that some of the stalwarts of this community feel that the community is too frail to survive some open criticism of some of it's members? I honestly thought this community was tougher and more resilient than that. A community should be able to withstand some conflict....it can't all be about "seashells and balloons".
>
>We've now seen a series of "J'accuse" posts from the Krameks, with comments ranging from "I'm your paymaster" to "too bad you're not an MVP" to insinuations that Naomi's activities were akin to stealing - and then openly said that they received an apology from Naomi and considered the matter closed...and then turned around and fired off some communications to Naomi's employer (just a few days after more disagreements between Naomi and Marcia on MSDN).
>
>And now we've not heard anything (at least that I'm aware of) from them in the online community where much of this originated. At least Naomi apologized for her actions - while I still view what she did as very wrong and very serious, after reading some of the comments on MSDN, I can at least sympathize with efforts to learn what was being said behind her back (though she could have accomplished that in far less serious ways).
>
>
>Kevin