<snip>

>I simply responded to they guy's post regarding the quality of FoxTalk and gave my opinion. You took it has yet another opportunity to take a personal shot at me. If you think that is productive - then so be it - I am not going to get into a mud slinging message with you. As for FoxTalk - I stand by those comments.
>
>Again, if you have a substantive point to make - then make it. For example, if you don't think the years 1995-1999 were good for FoxTalk - then debate that. And, if you think my contributions were poor - then say that. But - when saying those things or anything else substnative, please try to back up those conclusions with a requsite amount of reasoning.

You've always been a great contributor to the VFP world. In FoxTalk, in whitepapers or by other means. I'll always recognize that.

You're also right when you say that I made this thread take a turn I should'nt. My second reply included a personal shot and there was no reason for that other than doing it just to see your reaction. Perhaps after all those years on the UT you became an attraction. People want to see what JVP is going to say next. I'll never do that again. It's pointless.

But my first reply was I think correct. You see if I were at your level of expertise I would also have probably mentioned that FoxTalk was better during a certain period but I would never have said my name while saying it. I would have mentioned the name of the others that made this possible. But hey it's just me. You're free to say what you want. To me humility is the key here.

I don't say that my way is better than your way. I just wanted to see how you'd react to my first reply. I like to try to understand more, to a certain degree analyze people in general. That way if I ever need to work with someone that has a WE WE WE personality instead of a ME ME ME I know how to find that person. I have better ways to detect those trying to disguise themselves as WE WE WE when they are ME ME ME persons.