Hi Mark,

Here is what I feel and may or maynot be the consensus of the whole group last night. Please Comment if you feel other wise anybody.

>The other debate was the scope, UT only or try to involve all VFP community, and VFP only or all products.

What seems to be the general plan (still needs to be appreoved) is to start on the UT. We can describe it as a Beta Test for our new program, then when there is a working model, we will assess going Global, we defnitly have the resources.

>One debate was whether to try to enlist MS in general or the MS VFP Team in this endeavor. Some argued why MS was needed at all. Burn me once, shame on you, burn me twice, shame on me.

I beilive that we should use the VFP Team as a pipe, I think they would understand us (with the help of Markus Egger), but this we'd make this link after the proccesses are working.

Some other points:

1. Instead of MS descisions (obviously) the new awards will be all peer decided, wether by a committee of of peers are everybody still needs to be decided. The process of these descions will be what needs to be "worked out" locally before we lanuch a community wide program.

2. Because of this peer method, awards may be given and revoked incredibly faster, instead of a 4 - 9 month wait (thats what I've been told it used to be)

3. We feel multiple award types maybe more descriptive, and thus controversial, ie: "MVP for Online Support"; "MVP for Contributions" Contributions may include Technical articles, ground breaking products, or free ware. These categories are just ideas and not written in stone.