Sorry George, I can't agree here. (I've not quoted your reply, to save bandwidth).

I wasn't using Craig as an "example", Craig was the specific reason for my original post. He made a statement of fact - "thou shalt not do this" - with no word of explanation, just accept it as gospel, because of who I am. There was no indication of whether it was based on opinion, experience, prejudice or anything else. I did say what Craig didn't mention, namely his reason for his statement. All I can say is, what did Craig contribute - nothing.

I really don't care how you get to MVP status, it is irrelevant to what I am saying - just because you put letters behind your name, it does not make you god. In my opinion, it makes it all the more reason why you should back up your statement, after all, you've put the effort into getting the covetted 3 letters, so you should be able to explain your statement.

Your jutting in to defend Craig & Cindy is only making matters worse. As I said - the "inner sanctum" closing ranks to defend themselves. It just seems that the two people I have criticised really do not feel able to justify themselves to me.

You also say that you wouldn't criticise an MVP, unless your relationship with them led them to know your were only joking. So if they were obviously wrong & you didn't know them well enough you would keep your mouth shut, just becuse of three letters ? If they are using those letters as a badge of knowledge, then they must accept the responsibiluty that goes with it.

It seems that the argument here is that if you can't add anything, then shut up. Again a bad attitude. I may not be able to improve on a bad answer, but I can know when an answer is bad, should I keep my mouth shut, or should I point out that although I don't know the answer, I know the reply is wrong.

In this specific case, Craig gave no information to back up his view, so no-one really was able to say why he may or may not be right. This is my entire point -certain people, often with 3 letters attached, feel themselves in such a position they can make a statement which must not be contradicted or questioned. If its a matter of saying 1+1=2, then maybe you don't need to explain, if it's to say that although it's possible, you must not change the colours of disabled buttion, then how am I to know why. It may be MS's crap s/w which crashes if you change the colours, it may be because the colours happen to be your favourites, it may be because the colours are chosen for people with certain disabilities. Unless Craig gives enough information about his reasons, then it impossible to add to his reply, either for or against.

All you have managed to do here is confirm that this is not a comunity, it is a small clique, with several self-appointed experts. MVP is just 3 letters - it has no meaning outside it's own small community of other MVP's - all it says is that you accept one company's view of how things should be done.

I have no argument with anybody I have replied to, all I am trying to put across is a relative newcomers perspective on this small group.