>>When ANYONE spouts, in a VFP forum (and continuously) things like:
>>1) VFP is dead
>>2) anyone still doing VFP has their head in the sand and is a weenie
>>3) .NET is the ONLY way to develop and has been so for a long time
>>4) similar to above, incessantly and repeatedly...

I do think you twist JVP's messages. As a matter of fact I think JVP has said that VFP has its place. Heck I know he's working in it every day with Oracle now.

I won't debate the health of the VFP market with you because you already know my position. (oops I guess I did below<g>)

I think the position JVP has taken is that: if someone comes here asking about the health of VFP and they hear: all things are just hunky dory then that's what he takes issue with. Lots of people here say the market for VFP is fine which in JVP's opinion is intellectually dishonest.

VFP is on the decline, has been and will continue on that decline. Is there still work in VFP out there... Yes. Is the market growing, healthy and a good place to continue investing $$$ and time. In my opinion NO. If I had a niece or nephew looking to enter the software field I would never consider recommending VFP for them.

>>You can be very free with other people's money! Also, see below for >>the 'lets all get along' part.

FWIW... I am not being free with Michel's money. I have out of my own pocket hosted www.foxforum.com for some time now. I don't think it would kill him to add a little functionality to the free features.

>>For what it's worth, I have never used, and never will use, the twit >>filter. Seems to be inconsistent with a collegial atmosphere, at least in >>my little head.

So you admit liking reading disenting opinions. Well I do too. I read a bunch of other pubs to see what other people are thinking even if I dont agree with their positions.


>>This isn't quite true, as least as I've got things figured out. It is >>quite clear (now) that someone has to complain about a message first >>BEFORE any form of review/judgement is done. So, in fact, the problem >>STARTS with someone other than the UT. Perhaps someone who is genuinely >>offended by something, but also possibly by someone looking to nab people >>for their own silly reasons or possibly someone who wants a fully PC ?>>environment on the UT.
>>It's really really hard for all to get along when someone in their midst >>can ANONYMOUSLY bring some message to the attention of UT staff claiming >>offense, particularly if they're of the last two categories I named above.

If you have a post or 2 that you think would warrant his banishment from this form can you point me at them. I have been reading his posts over the last few weeks and cant really seem to find one that would justify banishment.


>>This is a pretty loose hook on which to hang your hat, wouldn't you say. >>UT might then face legal action of some kind because whatever they might >>say would be quickly twisted by JVP - as he has been seen to do in just >>about any "debate" involving him. If I were UT I surely wouldn't say >>anything else to anybody else!

Michel's censorship is what opens him to legal issues. Now this is not the speech of the members but the filtered/edited speech of the owner of this forum. Now the owner is accountable for all things said here by the members. This is why there are laws in the US protecting owners of online forums from things its members say.

Just my 2 cents.

Rodman