>Excuse me, actually our company is willing to pay 3 membership but as Michel was frequently answering us that they do not have other payment mode other than 'CARD' which we do not like because of frequent erroneous billing. We prefer electronic fund transfer. Michel knows that even when I was still new to UT we are willing to invest because of lots of benefits. 120US$ X 3 is just an equivalent of 50% of one Payroll System that we sell.
>
There are straightforward directions on how to pay by check in the informational materials available from the main page. By now, I'm sure even snail mail could've gotten a check to Canada.
>>
>>MVPs don't have to protect their status. The award is given for past performance, not a promise of future performance. Unlike many who spout nonsense on this site, MVPs tend to be accurate because they can be, and their expertise is well-established by what they've already said and done. The clueless tend to feel a need to speak up in utter absense of knowledge, in an attempt to provide themselves with an aura of authority.
>
>But you have to stay accurate and valuable to stay on that level. That's why MVP status is just but temporary thing. Today you may be accurate but tomorrow, that I don't know of, because nothing is permanent...
No, I have an obligation to be accurate because I'd appear to be another useless source of noise if I were not. While there are tangible benefits to being an MVP, I was a non-MVP for a whole lot longer than I've been one, and I already owned the tools (MSDN Universal, TechNet subscriptions) that make up the biggest direct benefit for most MVPs. The quality of my answers didn't change with my MVP status.
Maybe you're just annoyed at who Microsoft feels deserves recognition as an MVP? Or are we all just lowlife pondscum who only provide good answers motivated by greed and a need for the MVP moniker?
You're a convincing argument in favor of abandoning participation here for the MVPs; I certainly don't need to pay to have my motives and principles questioned.
