You are not reading my posts. Here it is: - MVP's got to be MVP's because they were already helping people and being advocates for the public - By accepting MVP status, you create a conflict of interest - You can do exactly the same things to help the public WITHOUT being an MVP - Therefore, what good is the title of MVP?
Therefore, you can help the public without creating a conflict of interest or help the public and have a conflict of interest. Its that simple. > Any company that would sit out in the parking lot with the public hanging > around while they decided the direction of their products would be idiots. > > Why must you look at MVP's as MS lackies? Why cant you look at them as > advocates for the public? You have heard from a number of MVP's today that > tell you exactly that, but you refuse to open your mind. In essence saying > we are all lying. > > Here is how you see it: > MS: Here is a new feature. > MVP: That sucks > MS: But you will tell everyone how great it is > MVP: OK > > Here is how it really is: > MS: Here is a new feature. > MVP: People will not like this. It is too much like the old feature that > people didn't like and was too hard for them to use. > MS: OK, thanks for the input. We will look into it. > MVP: Thanks > > -----Original Message----- > From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 3:04 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Shortcuts to Outlook objects > > > This proves my point. These discussions take place in private, not > public. > > > Big time. You should have been in the room with the Outlook MVPs and > > the Outlook Dev guys last Summit talking about the new security > > features. I feared lives would be lost. > > : [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
