>I agree with Bonnie and that is because we probably have the same informations based on what appeared to be a double standard. But the thing is that we don't know the deals that were made between you and Kevin or anyone else for that matter. So it's difficult to argue past that point

What "appeared" is not a fact. Anyone who uses UT frequently should know that we are extremely professional.

As for your request, that won't be discussed. Refer to first point made here.

We're smart enough to talk with anyone at any level in this community to explain specific issues when they arise with good manners that anyone would probably be able benefit of. As for arguing, I really don't see your point. I replied to Bonnie because her post was made in a way that it could have made several people to believe that we simply apply our procedures on new members only and not on regular members. It was my job to rectify that statement.

As for the initial message of this thread, the member did one post. Based on all topics discussed in it, he certainly understood by now that the content was written more in a way of spam than to provide more on the developers needs of this service. There are ways to write things and I believe that message could have been written differently so it wouldn't have looked as a spam.

So, I expect he would probably do otherwise next time and we all welcome his presence on the Universal Thread either as a developer or as a vendor.