It's time for the old folks home. LOL
--- Bill Arnold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mike, > > > > <snipped> > > > and a JVC-wannabe .NET evangelist. <snipped> > > > > > > > > > JVC-wannabe? The only JVC I know makes > electronics, and I'm sure you > > meant something else....but what? > > JVP. One of those typo's that makes a difference. > > It's been a while since that dispute took place. > > What I'm doing is this: defending the integrity and > purpose of a > professional FoxPro-centric list from what I see as > a sustained > onslaught. The world has all kinds of people, and > we've seen, there are > people who will jump onto any milkbox available to > ramble stupid-stuff > endlessly. I had an Aunt like that, who I loved, but > who would talk > utter nonsense for hours, given any chance. > > In the case of JVP, he took shots at VFP in a > VFP-users setting. We did > listen, but when it went on and on it was time to > tell him that this is > a VFP group and "enough", but he persisted anyway. > Some agreed with > asking him to leave (as at least one other VFP group > had done before), > and some didn't, but he left, so that ended it. > > In the space of some 10 years, this is the 2nd time > I've gotten involved > in a matter such as this. > > Now, we can listen to anti-VFP stuff until we all > get disgusted with the > product, but is that what we want? Those of us who > have created working > systems know full well that VFP can be made to work > very reliably in > many, many situations. There's always been "better > ways" to do > everything, but it always turns out that each has > it's own bugaboos. > There is no panacea - and that's especially true in > MS-land. Many of us > have large investments in VFP knowledge and > products. Some have already > dumped those investments based on "expert > testimony", and I'm sure some > have had second thoughts about their hasty flights. > For people still > here, and hopefully for more to join, we need to > recover our investments > in VFP and give long term strategic changes more > time and more careful > thought. > > So let's do VFP-stuff and have some useful > conversations about other > stuff as well. > > If the goal is a better, more professional list, > options I can think of > are: > > 1. Appeals ........ Didn't work > 2. Limit posts ... Wouldn't be done voluntarily, so > would require > software change > 3. A moderator ... we too quickly associate this > with 'thought police'. > > 4. Gatekeeper ..... requires a czar > 5. Cleaner ........ Cleans up when the need arises > 6. Do nothing ..... The list has already suffered > enough > > > Ed asked what I'm willing to do to contribute. I've > done #1 and stepped > up to #5. I wish I could think of a better option or > do more, but I yam > what I yam. > > > > Bill > > > > Michael J. Babcock, MCP > > > > _______________________________________________ > Post Messages to: [email protected] > Subscription Maintenance: > http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox > OT-free version of this list: > http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech > Searchable Archive: > http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox > This message: > http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, > are the opinions of the author, and do not > constitute legal or medical advice. This statement > is added to the messages for those lawyers who are > too stupid to see the obvious. > _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
