SNIP
>
>What bothers you more...the fact that MS does not *directly* address these issues, or the fact that they don't express a viewpoint that negates the viewpoints I address.

Neither. what bothers me most is that you and some others NEVER give MS a chance to express their true position on specific matters!!! You (and those others) come up with some 'answer' and the ONLY time that MS might be compelled to step in in such circumstances is when you (or those others) are patently wrong. Not being wrong doesn't automatically make you "right", but it does allow MS to remain silent when you are not patently wrong. This hurts us all because we do NOT get the true MS position on the matter under discussion!

>
>Whether you hear it from me or MS, does it really make a difference???

It makes a HUGE difference!!! Yours is, at best, an interpretation/theory/guess. Theirs would be the FACTS. With FACTS in hand we, as a community, can discuss options and take action. With your guesses in hand, especially combined with your need to repeat them over and over again, we can only remain inactive listeners.

>
>The fact is, MS has *already* addressed the issue. I am simply expressing my view point AND reiterating what MS and Ken has already said.

Not quite - you are providing your interpretation and embellishment of Ken's/MS' statements.

>
>As far as a true story is concerned, here is an important factoid: not once has MS and/or Ken come up here to say that what I have said repeatedly is off-base, inaccurate, or misleading.

Why should they when you are not patently wrong??? You may have the correct objective but be way off base as to the actual reasoning. We (the community) would like to know the real reasoning! OR you may be way wrong but MS elects to stay mute because this is a new avenue for them to explore.
If you said that MS will announce the end of VFP support at the end of August I would expect MS to quickly counter that statement. If you said that MS will discontinue support for VFP some time in the future there is no need for MS to respond. But there is no need for such a statement in the first place, yet you continue to make it, adding a 'sooner rather than later' qualifier to it.

>
>The guy asked a question and I gave him a timely response. If it is inaccurate, I am sure Ken will come up here to address the matter.

No, you gave him YOUR response. The same response that you give everybody all the time on the matter. WE KNOW YOUR POSITION. The guy knows your position! Enough already!!! Let those who wish to explore improving the future of VFP do so. There is no need to constantly crap on such attempts.
And no, Ken will likely not come here to refute your statements, even if they are inaccurate.

SNIP