John,

Here's a quote that IMO gets to the heart of things:

"He that is without sin, let him cast the first stone."

From one failure-prone human to another. *g*

It's been my observation that those who hold themselves to a very high standard do so for one of two reasons; One, to gain personal worth by publicly being better than others and, Secondly, to help others reach those higher levels and leaving the 'personal worth' stuff to the judgement of history.

Best,

DD

>Yup, that's me -- over sensitive. But if you read my posts going back, you'll see that I have always been this way. I like the people here, John.
>
>My posts and my slant on issues have not changed one iota since becoming a sysop. If Michel required that, I would not be a sysop. I am never going to say what I don't believe.
>
>But I do believe that we all can't be perfect. Ted Roche made an interesting comment to me not long ago: He said that no one can claim that they had done more than a few enterprise apps since VFP was released. Therefore, no one knows everything and mistakes occur.
>
>Personally, I know I make dumbass mistakes. A bunch of us do. I think it's the way we handle those mistakes that counts. When I see someone make an error I generally dont' call it to anyone's attention publicly.
>
>
>>That said, I think you are one of the more "over-sensitive" folks here then. You confuse debating the technical merits of another's post as calling them a "dumb-ass". The fact is, by many, what I do is very useful because I go the mat to set the record straight.
>>
>>They say a little knowledge is worse than knowing nothing at all.
>>
>>However, the heart of my question still focused on the whole "dual-standard" issue, which as a sysop here, you did not refute....
>>
>>>Again, who the hell knows? I think a major difference between my posts and yours is that I try not put myself in a position where I am forced to call someone a dumbass. IMHO, there is no useful purpose served by this. OTOH, you wear your heart on your sleave and sometimes get kibboshed because of that.
>>>
>>>Just my opinion. I could be wrong.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Maybe what? Are you acknowledging there is a dual-standard here?
>>>>
>>>>That is my point John, with regard to attacking topics, point, as opposed to attacking people personally. I think I do what you do.. Sure my langauge may be a bit forceful, but it is the same nonetheless...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Maybe....but I wasn't attacking anyone, just the topic. Who knows?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>but isn't this a pretty lame topic?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I have to believe that if I said this, I would be labeled as a personal attacker...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Personally, I don't think it is a personal attack. However, I would bet dimes to donuts that if I said it, more than a few folks would crawl out the woodwork and lay it on me...yet again..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If you get the same grief I do, then I will know that folks are consistient and not hypcritical. If you don't, then I know that I have less latitude than others..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I don't really care. I do however think it is important to call attention the double-standard that clearly exists here....
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Pardon my interruption and I don't know if this has been said already, but isn't this a pretty lame topic? One is hard-pressed to find articles about the future of any language beyond the next version because MS is not going to give competitors something to compete against:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I can see it now, MS announced that eventually VB will host 10 widgets so Inprise starts working on Delphi2001 that will support 20 widgets.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The best thing one can do is point to reviews of VFP from the last release, point to what has been said about the new release and leave it at that.