This one's gonna RUN! :-)

>Personally, I'd rather see efforts focus on helping Nadya get back on track than seeking some kind of vengence.
>
>
>\
>>Charles, you do realize that you're just only one of a small pool of people kicking this around and around?
>>
>>No, seriously, you mentioned some very good facts and arguments here. This message can be added to the now huge number of messages in these threads that really ought to be seen by certain MS employees.
>>
>>
>>>As I find your technical contributions - both here and in your various publications - most valuable and instructive, I also think you've contributed by lending weight to the idea that there is behavior that is just plain wrong.
>>>
>>>I've already said I find these slap-fests amazingly infra dig - especially since they involve intelligent people who should certainly know better - but unfortunately they seem to be a fact of life in communities where high IQs are generally a lot more common than developed social skills. And when the animus goes outside our rarified community atmosphere to have real-life impact it is especially unfortunate.
>>>
>>>But here's the part that really surprised me about it all:
>>>
>>>I mentioned in another thread that my own MVPs came back in a day when MS Bob was on the MSDN ( which I think was loaded on cassette tape ) and Foxpro Devcon attendance was measured in 4 figures - with a very heavy Microsoft participation. The one thing I remember about it was that it was made pretty clear that while this was an award and you got goodies you had better be very careful about how you represented your status to the outside world. I remember a lot of anguish over whether or not it was ok to put MVP on business cards, websites etc. I do know Microsoft was monitoring the Foxpro community closely enough in those days that you would be quickly told if you were giving the incorrect impression about your affiliation with MS. ( I also remember that back in those days we didn't have a secret handshake or expect anyone to care what we thought about anything non-technical except in that we may have earned a certain amount of credibility among folks who knew us in real life.
>>I'd
>>> suspect that hasn't really changed much. )
>>>
>>>I cannot imagine writing a letter like that - especially with malicious intent that could possibly result in some kind of legal action - and including the word Microsoft anywhere in the body or signature and especially not with the intention of lending weight to my arguement. Maybe it is a measure of how much MS no longer knows or cares what is going on in the Foxpro world that nothing seems to have been made of this ( at least publicly ) but I have to say from a purely pragmatic viewpoint I'd have really been very reluctant to sign a letter that way.
>>>
>>>The second point is that if I were a frequent ( and quite skilled and popular ) speaker at conferences - especially European conferences - I would hope I would have realized that a PR hit of this magnitude would at best lead to some unpleasant interactions face-to-face and at worst ...
>>>
>>>I always hate to see people who have always been nice to me do things that make me want to smack them, but indication of character flaws aside, I am always disturbed when smart people exercise such incredibly bad judgement.
>>>
>>>And I agree that while this is an increasingly small pond, Rod's appearance at the beginning of this thread and awareness on the part of other people I've known for a long time who never even log onto UT does indicate to me that word gets around. And what gets around comes around.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> So, I do not think it is fair to want/demand any MVP_VFP to take a position
>>>>
>>>>Greg,
>>>>
>>>>I generally agree with your comments....one point, however...
>>>>
>>>>To me, it wasn't a matter of wanting or demanding - I expected more out of them here. Some of the individuals who posted their views on issues like JVP, suddenly don't want to talk about this up here.
>>>>
>>>>The Krameks seemed quite eager to post about what Naomi did back in June, and also eager to broadcast their views on her work/posting habits, with some pretty strong statements....but (it would appear) less eager to provide explanation for their actions on the very forums where they posted about her.
>>>>
>>>>I have to say this, because it's been on my mind for some time now. Andy acknowleged here on the UT that he was asked (by someone he respected) to essentially drop the infamous hacking issue re: Naomi. That's around the time when we saw the "this matter is now closed once and for all" from Andy. And then a short time later, roughly two months (if our collective general reconstruction of the facts is correct), the letters are sent. Unless I'm missing some huge significant facts...if I were the individual who originally asked Andy to "back off", saw a public statement as such, and then learned about letters being sent, I'd be pretty hacked off.
>>>>
>>>>If anyone is reading this and thinking, "no, you don't have all the facts"....by all means, please speak up.
>>>>
>>>>A question...is it not reasonable to believe that if they had the time to complain and protest about Naomi, as well as the time to compile statistics about Naomi's online activities and draft correspondances to Naomi's employer, they would also have the time to provide some kind of public online explanation?
>>>>
>>>>According to Naomi, as of yesterday, she has not heard from the Krameks since she was terminated. If this is indeed true (and I sincerely hope that Naomi is being honest), that is perhaps the saddest aspect of all.
>>>>
>>>>IMO, a strong community can withstand adversity.
>>>>
>>>>I'll say this - I have a new-found respect for a few other folks up here.
>>>>
>>>>What we've seen here is not a model of strong community leadership.