>>It would be difficult for JVP to respond here because he is no longer able to post here. If you want you can check out profox or correspond with him on compuserve or send him e-mail
>
>Really. I had no idea (NOT). I suggest you read my response again - I was referring to David Stevenson responding to Tamar and specifically about the cost of the Distribution Kit being considered a royalty charge.
>
>And on the subject of JVP: I tried to resist the temptation to bring this up but can no longer resist. He has been banned from this forum. Setting aside the merits and politics of the ban. I would like to know if you requested permission from Michel Fournier to make your post. And do you think the rest of us are incapable of subscribing to the ProFox mail list in order to get more of JVP's verbal diarrhea? Personally I would prefer not to hear from JVP, vicariously or otherwise. Also please be aware that (in this post) I am exercising considerable restraint.

Houston;

You must have been reading my mind, I read yours or there is more than a little truth to what you have stated!

I had the feeling we were going to be “blessed” with cut and paste questions and answers from one forum to another. The thought sickens me as if I wish to communicate directly I know how to accomplish that.

Did Michel approve of Rod’s cut and paste of the JVP message? I do not know but it did cause tension at this location. The answer to the original question will come from Microsoft (I hope). Anything else is speculation on the part of others.

There are no “experts” on this issue within the development community, quasi or otherwise who have the answer. We are fully capable of rendering our own opinions right or wrong without the assistance of JVP, directly or indirectly.

The intent of presenting this information may have been in good faith on Rod’s part, with or without knowledge of JVP or Michel. Regardless of the circumstances it does seem most inappropriate.

Tom