Ed,

I'm sorry, but I don't understand your reply to my post. I was, if you read back a bit, suggesting that ranting and raving wasn't a good idea but rationale duscussion was. I don't believe I mentioned anything about censoring or about what you should read or not read. Did you mean to post this reply to Jeff who was suggesting this?

>>Jeff,
>>
>>>Never met a professional who was without angst from time to time.
>>
>>Agreed, but that doesn't mean I go around telling everyone about my angst.
>>
>
>Hold on - while I'm entirely sick of the "VFP is dead" threads, what in hell gives you the right to censor my messages? And more importantly, what gives you the right to decide what topics I can or can't read or participate in?
>
>If this option were implemented, I'd bail in a heartbeat. I may object to the rumor-mongers, but I object to the thought police even more. I'm certainly not qualified to decide whose messages do and don't have value, or what threads might not be in the best interest of VFP as a product, but I trust my own judgement on the matter much more than most other peoples'.
>
>I'd like to see a 'twit filter' implementation so that I could avoid messages from specific people, or a topic filter. But that leaves the decision of what I do and don't read to me, not the judgement of someone else, much less mob rule. I've seen an awful lot of things where the majority of people were wrong in their judgement and understanding...