Hi,
I do agree with UT decision regarding JVP's ban (assuming he was classified as a Troll), the basic reasoning I use, to draw a parallel is: If someone keeps poking a snake with a stick and the snake bites them, I don't belt the snake, I belt the person on the other end of the stick, for being a pest.

Live & let Live, we have much larger problems to solve, solving problems related to VFP, world peace etc.


>I have never said that JVP should be exiled but have often wondered what was his motivation for incessantly posting the same "message" with different wording in any pro VFP thread and endlessly engaging any responder in debate that almost always degrades to childish noise. He seemed to take great pleasure pushing the hot buttons of many people here. I usually lurk here and read most posts and have never resorted to a Twit filter. I just bypass posts that seem to go on endlessly with no real purpose and respond in a constructive way when someone asks a question that I may be able to answer to kind of pay it forward for all the help I have received. I agree that it is Michaels right to choose who may use his forum, but do hate to see anyone banished for expressing their ideas. I would hope that JVP has just voluntarily decided to move on and pursue a more constructive outlet for his energy but doubt that that is the case.
>
>
>>I completely agree with Michel's right to determine who may use his forum and who may not. It is his right as the owner. He does not have to even provide any type of explanation if he chooses not too.
>>
>>However, after reading your post, I do wonder what the difference in numbers would be between those that choose to leave a forum based on reading a member's posts and finding them bothersome (category 1) and the number of members that would choose to leave a forum based on the subjective exclusion of its members that voice a differing opinion (category 2). Whether or not I agree with the exiled member's posts or the tone of the messages is not an issue with me. I expect to disagree with the majority on a number of issues throughout my life and if it ever bothered me to the point of not being able to ignore the posts, I would twit the member. If the twit feature was not available to me then I would pay the membership fee to have it (which I do). However, if a higher number of members fall into category1, I find that worrisome.
>>
>>
>>>I agree, it is totally subjective and enforcement is at the discretion of the moderators of this forum. Obviously he has either crossed some line in someone's mind or perhaps he has volunarily decided to move on. I hope it was the latter but doubt it. I have no ill will towards JVP, normally read his posts and sometimes actually get something of substance from them but his contributions of late have led to repetitive heated exchanges (not necessarily started by JVP) that disrupt the main purpose of this forum, which is to provide a constructive exchange of ideas and help with programming problems for the VFP community. It is much like the sexual harrassment policies where someone creates a hostile environment by seemingly innocent remarks. If someones presence creates a hostile environment causing paying members to leave, it is the business of the owner of this forum to make some decision to protect his interest.
>>>
>>>JVP's "contributions" here for the last few years have been much like an agnostic attending church each week ostensibly as the self appointed savior on a mission to help the “lost souls” there to see the light as he has but in fact is there just for the thrill of disrupting and irritating anyone who will listen. The real shame is that he is an intelligent person who has constructively contributed to the Visual FoxPro community in the past and could just as easily use his boundless energy for constructive purposes here or elsewhere. Unfortunately that might not allow him to feel superior and act out in the arrogant, condescending manner that he has become accustomed to.
>>>
>>>I wish him well.
>>>
>>>>>Perhaps he met the definition of internet troll.
>>>>
>>>>Maybe in someone's opinion ... a little too open to interpretation, wouldn't you say?
>>>>
>>>>~~Bonnie
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks Dave, I thought I might have been the only one questioning this ban.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>~~Bonnie
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Sylvain,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I have the same question as Bonnie. John hasn't made any posts in the recent threads that qualify as something that should cause him to be removed from the UT.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>You start to act like Walter with his "troll alert" ;->
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Michel, I believe that this post violates the new rules. Better be careful now Denis...