Let me be as plain as I can be, John. . .

Everyone on UT knows your position as regards the future of VFP at MS.

There is absolutely NO NEED to incessantly repeat your position! Give those who want to try to extend the future of VFP a chance to discuss options without your constant interruptions/repetition!!!

>>
>Neither. what bothers me most is that you and some others NEVER give MS a chance to express their true position on specific matters!!!
><
>
>But it is not my chance to give or take away. How am I taking away MS's chance to respond?

You mean that you really don't see how???? Let me try again to clarify...
Someone asks a question about which only MS knows the real facts. You posit an answer to the question (earnestly believing it to be true and factual). Unless you are dead wrong (possibly endangering some legal aspect of MS' standing) MS no longer has any necessity to respond. Why would they respond when they can keep their hand to their vest by staying mum???
The MAIN reason that you consistently respond on this issue is your overwhelming need to sound right. Even IF you are dead RIGHT we can never know it because your response preempts MS' need to respond!!! Another reason that you reply consistently on this issue is that you KNOW that MS WILL NOT RESPOND once you do (unless you are dead wrong). This serves your purpose - to embellish your standing as a forecaster (in your eyes at least) - but it deprives the rest of us of THE FACTS!

SNIP
>
>Fine... then I suggest you posit this question to Ken:
>
>"Does the position JVP and others articulate accurately reflect MS's position as far as VFP is concerned?"

Sounds like a question YOU should ask of KenL.

>
>Whether you like it or not, whether you want to admit it or not, I have pretty much laser beamed on MS's position in re: VFP.

How will Iever know??? Your incessant reply of the same stuff over and over again precludes MS' need to reply at all (see above).


SNIP
>
>I contend that what I posit is not only fact, but observable fact. Perhaps the most important fact is that MS has not countered the position. The EASIEST thing for MS to do is counteract what I have said, assuming that what I have said is false.

I have given you reasons why MS might be far better off to NOT argue your position. If I were MS, I certainly wouldn't bother to counter what you have stated over and over again.

>
big SNIP
>
>I am right on this...and it pisses you off (and others) to no end that this is the case....

You may be right on this, and if you are it doesn't "piss me off" near as much as it simply discourages me. By the way it matters not that it is YOU who is (maybe) right on this. What matters is the fact itself IF it is right.
Allowing that it looks to be "right" at the moment, WHY are you so hell-bent on discouraging anyone from pursuing a change in MS' approach on the subject??? This is where I conclude that your motives are stricly self-aggrandizing and have nothing to do with contributing to the future welfare of the VFP community!

>
>As for the future of VFP, I did my part...I am the one who came up with naming the next version Toledo... < bg >...

Good for you. Now do the honourable thing and leave people's thread ALONE in future when they want to discuss alternatives to improve the standing of VFP at MS. PLEASE!!!