John,

>First of all, I don't think JVP needs me to defend him, BUT...

Indeed I don´t think JVP needs anyone to defend him. It is his profession.

>I have been a member of the UT since around 1995-96. I've had opportunities to chat with JVP and talk to him on the telephone. He was always polite and extremely well-ofinformed and went out of his way to be helpful. In all the years I've been reading his posts, he has never, IMO, gone directly out of his way to intentionally harm anyone.

There were, many, many incidents. Just look at his message toward craigB, hurting him directly by degenerating the book he wrote for integrating crystal reports into VFP. In your culture this bashing might be normal and accepted, but not in mine. There are numerous examples to find here on the UT where the same insults and tacticts are used.

>If anyone has been harmed in all of this it was JVP. He strikes me as the type of person who needs for things to be orderly and truthful. Most of the scuffles here have occurred because of John's attempts to set the record straight and the offending party could not handle the arguments put forth by JVP.

Or John could not handle the arguments to dismiss his point, after which personal attacks and namecalling followed.


>>I´ve been in this same boat before with other members up here. I´m a reasonable guy, but if someone wants to be nasty, I can get nasty.

>Pig-headeded stubborness even when wrong is not being reasonable by any definition the term.

That is your observation, not mine. Who is to say someone is wrong or right? You might agree with JVPs stubborness, others agree with mine.

BTW, if you can´t see that you´re beeing rude to me by calling me names, then this discussion is useless.

Walter,