>>>Hi All
>>>
>>>I think its great that UT have decided to offer a PUTM to VFP MVP's but I think it would be better, imho, that this offer should be given to those members that contribute the most to the UT technically and not be based on MS MVP status per se. There are members here that are not MS MVP but who contribute a great deal of value to the community. (No I am not referring to myself <g>).
>>>
>>>Anyway, nice move UT!
>>
>>Jos,
>>
>>Agreed. But I this might cause problems. Who's to say who is worthy?
>>
>>BTW, thanks Michel.
>
>Hi George.I think its very simple really. The current Personality of the Year survey is being done. Given sufficiently large participation I would guess that the top X (UT to decide how many) members voted for are probably worthy of a PUTM. The UT can always review the top X candidates against their contributions as an added confirmation. This creates an added motivation perhaps to valued contributors and recognizes their efforts in helping this community.
>
>My main point is that, imo, the granting of a PUTM should have nothing to do with MS MVP status - I think many members have no interest in MVP status whatsoever yet contribute an enormous value to our community.

Jos,

In principle, I agree with you. However, there's a big difference between principle and reality.

Back in 1999, Microsoft tried to "pull the plug" on the MVP program. However, it was the non-MVPs on this and other forums that got them to change their minds.

In my mind, Michel's decision was strictly a business one. You don't get to be an MVP by the number of posts you make. You get to be one based on the accuracy of those posts. An MVP, by the rules of the program (which are available to all on-line) answers more questions than they ask, and the one's that they answer have a high degree of accuracy.

For myself, I don't put MVP in my sig block because the award is for what you've done (past tense). There's no guarantee that what I post to-day will be correct.

I did have, however, a poor experience when I did put it in my sig block. When Carl Warner, the longtime editor of the VFUG newsletter (to which I contributed) decided to step down, I made a post here thanking him for his contributions to the community. I changed my sig for the purpose of saying that I, as an MVP, appreciated his contribution. Unfortunately, because I didn't remove it, I got a number of posts that seemed to be directed to the point of challenging me because I was an MVP.

By "giving" MVPs a PUTM, Michel hopes to attract more MVPs (I'm surmizing this). This helps to enhance the value of this site, and, in turn, attracts more people who may become PUTMs, or better, MVPs themselves.