Doug

it is not the disagreeing that gets to those on the other side of this thread, but the tone in your writing. instead of saying something like 'you guys get on and do that and i will do this, and perhaps together we can accomplish more', you tell us we are in a panic expending emotional energy that could be far better spent if we did it your way, or just shut up, trust ms and let them rule the roost. we are all (apart from ms) supposed to be on the same side here, so as far as i am concerned, why don't we support each other as in the quotes above and get on with life? as i see it, there is no one solution to this problem, so the aim of this thread should be mutual support and the seeking of more and more ways we can try to persuade ms, or even just make ms aware that inexpensive 'marketing' instead of a couple of cheap ads to the chior is needed.

i do recall that in the early part of the last centuary, women weren't allowed to vote. if they kept their mouths shut and just towed the line and believed blindly that the powers that be were aware of their desires, do you folks that are averse to vociferously drawing attention to the VFP situation believe that they would be voting today? sure as hell NO! they would still be packin' lunch for pappy to go stand in line to screw up his punchcard (not to mention the fun he could have impregnating his chad!). i am sure there are a couple of other such examples that could be used. perhaps the civil rights issues, freedom of choice, gay rights, etc, etc,... no?

Doug/others
sorry - i forgot to include the text i was responding to!
john

*****
>>Well, who's remaining silent? As I have asserted before I happen to be of the mindset that my work speaks louder than my words. That's really all.
>
>..and by the look of your ongoing and prolific desire to deride folks who don't trust the ms way, your words far outnumber the amount of work you appear have...and i tend to suspect that the publicly aired spare time you have on your hands is directly related to type of logic you have applied to this thread.

Well, if I've derided someone as in running them down for having a different opinion I'd surely like to see the evidence. If you are thinking that because I may disagree with someone that this is the same as deriding them then IMO you need a refresher course in the proper use of the English language. It is possible for folks to disagree on an issue without getting personal I'd think.

Now, if I have so done I'd surely apologize but it seems to me that you are essentially asserting by this statement that my character is of such a degraded nature that I would actually do what you are asserting. I'd think that unless you can provide evidence of your position that you are, as the say, the pot calling the kettle black and that you would be sitting in the seat of the hypocrite. Please demonstrate to me that disagreeing with someone is derisive, would you please?

Regaredless of this silly personal stuff that you have brought up I'd like to ask a simple question; Is it somehow wrong for me to assert that I'd like to help move this product forward by virtue of a demonstrated world-class product as opposed to a letter writing campaign? Like I said, Iif Michael wants to take that route I think it's great. I don't and I'd like the same courtesy. If that is somehow seen by you as 'deriding' then IMO you'll just have to live with that thought I guess...

I'm quite comfortable that there are multiple opinions on how best to influsnece Microsoft but it seems that others do not share my opinion I guess.


>
>i am under my desk - you can start yelling......NOW <g>

Oh, good grief. Get a grip. <g>