John -

In case you are still here - I note your points, agree with most, and wish you the best.

Eleanor


>>Larry returns the "Hello" and so do I. It's been a long time.
>
>Yes it has.
>
>
>>This is the second time I've "chattered" since joining UT . . .
>>it took your hypnotizing communication skills to draw me out into the "dark". ;}
>>
>
>Thanks!!
>
>
>>
>Hopefully you are sitting down, because I don't disagree with you about
>the future of FoxPro development or the need for FoxPro folks to be ready, willing, and able to work with other products. The same would hold true for any other software, and most other occupations.
>>
>
>The issue with Fox is a blinding flash of the obvious. When I comment, it is normally in response to a question about the state of affairs. I also comment when people post their comments about how MS has yet again "dissed" the product.
>
>>
>It is the comments you make that are not necessary to the message and are inclined to polarized viewpoints that got my attention. Example: Stating that someone would not know what it takes for disbarment or insinuating that someone was not bright enough to understand your point.
>>
>
>Suffice it to say Mr. Bellmer's comments were inapproprate. I'll leave it at that.
>
>
>>
>People are more inclined to hear and accept a suggestion if they are not angry with the messenger.
>>
>
>Agreed. But then again, I am not that concerned with whether people accept what I have to say.
>
>>
>Adding to my original three points which were intended for your benefit:
>>
>1. People will choose their own truth and that truth will not necessarily be logical. To ceaselessly argue with belief makes that truth even stronger. You defeat yourself. Your effort is wasted and your point is lost.
>>
>
>Perhaps...But as each day goes by, I think the point becomes more clear than ever.
>
>
>>
>2. Never assume you know your audience and _never underestimate them. In a forum or in a courtroom or a corporate board room - if you miscalculate this you defeat yourself.
>>
>
>Good advice.
>
>
>
>>
>3. RE: enlighten you? I wasn't talking about codified law. When acceptable rules of behavior(which are defined by consensus in any group) are not followed, the consequence is that people will become defensive, will not listen, and you defeat yourself.
>>
>
>Actually, I think it is people like Jim Nelson and Gerry Schmitz who obfuscate profanities enough to bypass the filters here who are guilty of violating the acceptable rules of group behavior.
>
>
>>
>I'm sorry to hear that you will only be here for 3 more days. You have always had a lot to contribute. If we could just cure you of having a taste for blood . . .? ;)
>>
>
>I give as good as I get. But IAC, it is time to move on. We are at 101 days..... 2 to go...!!