Hi John,

I wonder what forums they reviewed participation for on .net? I noticed that regular contributors on the UT's .net section did not make it and I felt at least three were definitely deserving (KM, CG, and BB)...also I can think of two more off the top of my head that regularly contribute reliable resolutions in VFP on the UT: Steve Gibson and John Livermore.

>George
>
>You may recall in 1999 I dared to observe apparent life memberships for some MVPs, also a growing sense of "self-selected elite" status based on comradery more than contribution. I was told to "go to Hell" by the then MS rep.
>
>If selection is more transparent these days, bravo Microsoft. Certainly it makes me feel better to see obvious contributors like you and Sergey recognised, as with most of the others. I see lots of other regular contributors there as well, all credit to them. However, looking at the list I can still see one or two whose "contribution" to their peers is minimal but whose promotion of MS is presumably deserving of reward. If we could eliminate those last few, the award would provide much better recognition for those who share their expertise unselfishly and routinely. either that, or there should be "contribution" and "cooperation" streams so we can tell what special service was performed to achieve the reward.
>
>Regards
>
>JR