>But an MPV suggesting that I (a paying member) take a hike because of a difference in opinion? This is unacceptable behavior for a MVP and I will not tolerate it - particularly because this is the second time he has done it.
>
>As such, I am now drafting a letter to MS concerning this individual as well as a few others who, in my opinion, make the real MVPs, like yourself, look bad.
>
>Maybe MS was right in questioning the MVP program afterall.
>

Jeff, I'd advise that you reconsider this; the MVPs contribute a great deal to UT and the VFP community in general. You're entitled to your opinion, but IMO, John is one of the good guys who fought quite hard to see that some things like the Cert program really got the publicity it needs.

While you're condeming people for attitude, better include me in that group too - I encourage anyone who isn't satisfied with UT the way it is, doesn't have anything positive to say about how it might be more equitably addressed, and in general feels that the MVP presense on the UT is worthless, ought to vote with their feet. There are plenty of free sites - the MS public newsgroups, FoxForum, and others - available to you. If UT doesn't meet your needs, perhaps you'd find one of those sites more to your liking...

I support UT; while there may be flaws in the financial structure and Michel may need some additional Krazy Glue to keep things up and running, I've benefited from UT, and don't begrudge the cost of the PUTM (I pay mine in spite of my MVP status - I just renewed for the year 2000 a few days ago). I'd like to see some changes made so that a lesser contribution could be made to allow people who don't see the value of the PUTM as I do could at least show their support for UT without the $125CDN ($100CDN before January 1). If this were to happen, I'd like to see some of the privileges of the basic, non-paying member rolled back, recovered at the minimal membership level (I suggested something in the $20 range looks reasonable to me.)

More importantly, I support John Koziol, who, on top of being a genuinely nice guy, and a big help on the boards, has worked a great deal behind the scenes to get the Cert stuff going. I don't know why you feel a need to pick a fight with him. He's entitled to express and opinion. So are you. Unless you're subject to undue radiation exposure coming from a touch of criticism, I'd grin and bear it - it's just ASCII over the router.

Finally, if you feel that a personality conflict with one or more of the MVPs is grunds for you to demand that MS do away with the MVP program again, that's your right. I think you'd be hurting the MS user community if you got your way, and I'll actively lobby to keep the MVP program, not just for my status, but because of the benefit I gain from the input of other VFP MVPs, not to mention non-VFP MVPs (John Saville, who runs the NT FAQ site, is an NT Server MVP, and his site's the first thing I hit when I run into problems with NT.)

>
>>PMFJI, but, AFAIK, John's in the same boat I am (and Ed Rauh). All three of us re-newed our PUTMs before we received the award this year. None of us received any sort of rebate.