Hi Jim,

>Doug,
>
>SNIP
>>
>>Jim, I don't know why this seems to be so personal in your mind. If you have a beef with any specific individual why don't you exhibit a little courtesy and speak directly to them and at least make an attempt to resolve your differences? Privately would be my suggestion.
>
>It is you, Doug, who keeps telling me that this seems 'so personal' to me. It is 'personal' in that I believe that the situation is wrong and I believe that I was an early raiser of the issue. It is not personal otherwise, in any way, other than I believe it is wrong and badly needs correction.

Really? I "keep" telling you this??

>
>>
>>Name calling doesn't suit you nor anyone else and certainly doesn't lend itself to a useful discussion of the issues it seems. If you are referring to me I'd just suggest you read my posts a little more carefully.
>
>I had to think a bit before I used Tom's delicate turn-of-phrase at the start of my comment, fearing that people would think it was just an indirect cheap-shot at them (and of course you came to mind, being active in this thread. I decided that it should be clear that I was simply repeating what Tom had written so that I could make a point and that the point couldn't be easily made if I didn't include it there.
>And, in fact, it could be said that I called myself what Tom wrote.
>To be clear, I was NOT referring to you, nor to any one else. My point was - and from more experience than anyone else on UT on the matter - that people who raise issues regarding MS are generally categorized as a**holes of one kind or another by certain here and that likely dissuades others from speaking their minds on issues here. Period.

Well, I guess I'm confused then. Why then use the phrase if you weren't thinking of someone. If, as you suggest, you were thinking about me (I'm flattered. <g>) then at least have the courtesy and strength of character to state your position directly - or perhaps, as I suggested, in a private email - unless you were just spoiling for a fight. <g>

As far as me categorizing you as an ***hole I haven't to my recollection ever thought that about you. Overly sour and negative at times perhaps but I just figure it's something you're working on so NBD and we all have our bad days. Personally, I could care less what position you hold vis a vis Microsoft's corporate policy regarding the release of bugs except for a mild interest in your reasoning regarding your position perhaps. I guess I just don't understand why you seem to feel so picked on simply because there are others who disagree with you on some issues.. You do seem thin skinned at times and that's ok too but I certainly respect your opinions and, of course, your right to hold whatever opinion you want.

Perhaps I've just misunderstood you and I apologize profusely if I have but I recall when I first posted a message here way back that you were quite quick to jump on my case and start calling me names and then, after the fact when you noticed my '< g >' you apologized and, of course, I accepted - again NBD. Maybe that's colored my thinking... I know for a fact that I rub some folks wrong and I do try and be as friendly as possible - though I'm sure I fall fall short of perfection.

I don't hold grudges. They're not worth it and there are far more inportant issues in life that losing a friendship over some silly disagreement like this IMO.

I value your insights. I doubt I'll always agree with you and I certainly don't expect you to always agree with mine. I have always thought that the vigorous exchange of ideas and thinking and so forth was what this was all about. I'm not offended that others disagree with me. As a matter of fact I quite enjoy it. Mike comes after me hammer and tong over some religious thinking and I quite enjoy it! He's a very bright fellow and always brings something to the table.

So.. I apologize if I've hurt your feelings.

>
>
>>
>>All I'm suggesting is that there are other approaches and if that means I'm an "over vocal egotistical asshole" then so be it.
>>
>>As I mentioned to Tom I have concluded that the best route is through the strength of my deeds rather than the anything else, but I'm entirely comfortable that others feel differently. What's wrong with that? Are you just unable to accept a different set of opinions?
>
>Not at all, and if you look back on this thread I don't think you'll see me telling you to do anything (or togo anywhere or...).

No, I don't recall you ever telling me anything of the sort. As I mentioned above, that wasn't my concern. I was, however, curious as to whom you were referring to with your ***hole remarks as they seemd very pouty to me and I wanted to see if I was whom you were thinking and kind of get it out in the open so we can deal with it and get past it. Fair enough? <s> I was just checking. <g>


>We do differ, though, in that I consider my pushing this issue exactly as a "deed" and you consider it as something else. We differ, but I haven't argued with you about that.
>Jim

I don't have any problem should we differ on this issue. You need to be aware that I've had the opportunity to have these kinds of discussions regarding bugs tracking and so forth with folks for some 12 years now. Perhaps I'm the one being impatient with you for which I apologize.