>>He spoke at every major show.
>
>But his topic was not on VFP, it was on SQL Server.
>

And are you now saying that SQL Server is of no value to the Fox Community? Are you now saying that only pure Fox topics are what counts? Jim Duffy has been speaking primarily on SQL Server - and yet that seems to count.

You have got to be kidding here Ken!


>>Wonder why Rod is listed as Editor in Chief then? Nonetheless, Rod does manage to get Fox content into Code.
>
>
Did he author the content? There are no magazine editors on any of the MVP programs, only people who contribute "content" to the community.
>

Did he author the content? No - but he facilitates it getting published. That goes to influence. When he speaks at a show - he is contributing content. Finally, I do believe you have at least 1 magazine editor (or perhaps co-editor) among the VFP MVP ranks.

>>Nonetheless, he is contributing - more I might add than some who received the award.
>
>You do not know the list of activities of each MVP in comparison. The FoxForum.com community site is the only one that has not been updated (new features or value-add) since the 1990s. The MVP award is only for activity in the past 12 months, and is only an annual award which must be renewed each year to continue as an MVP.
>

No new features? So what you are saying is that if Rod had taken the 5 minutes it would have taken to add a VFP wish list section - that would count as a new feature.

Every month - there is a bill that comes in that has to be paid for the hardware - the Internet access, etc. He does this as a contribution to the community. This one thing you seem to be blowing over constantly.

The fact is, the site does one thing - and it does it well. Piling on new features for the sake of new features is a rediculous proposition. The question you have to ask yourself is whether the site is relevant and whether its presense is a net positive to the community today. If it is - then you have current activity.


>
EVERY new VFP MVP was nominated by someone in the community, meaning, one or more people suggested that we add the person to the MVP program based on their active contributions in the FoxPro. Not one person has nominated Rod to be a VFP MVP in the past two years other than you.

We have yet to see one post here or receive one private email or any posts on the private MVP newsgroups suggesting that Rod should be a VFP MVP. We did exchange email with Rod as well as had a lengthly phone call with him during the award review process, he was considered and not ignored.
>

Fine, Rod was nominated by one or more people. Whats your point?


>
I appreciate you wanting Rod to be an VFP MVP, but we must be consitent on awards based on contributions related to "FoxPro" and the "FoxPro community" for VFP MVP awards. This is what the FoxPro community wants and expects.
>

Oh - so now the MVP IS guided by external opinion. A few posts ago, you tried to clarify that point by saying external opinion did not matter. Which is it? Last I heard, MS was the sole determinant. I was not aware that what the Fox community wanted or expected was a driving force in the matter.

The more you write - the more you contradict yourself. Its like that time when you tried to defend why new features never go into service packs. That debate did not go so well either...

Your desire is to be consistient - but the process is anything but consistient - at least in this case.

Regards,

< JVP >