Most Valuable Professional

[Todd Bardoni]

I suppose that "MVP" is a title you earn studying. Could you give details about that?. How much time you study, where, cost. It's just curiosity.!

Maybe i'm not making the correct questions.

Are you maybe thinking about Microsoft Office User Specialist? Do a search on the web regarding this...there's plenty of info out there...

 

[Legacy 12630]

With a view to promoting correct English usage...

...self-explanory...

Need I say more.



I know, I know..."Board Nit."

No-one likes a nit-picking smart-***.

 

[Todd Bardoni]

No-one likes a nit-picking smart-***.

Well, I am the "Board Nit", as you've kindly pointed out and I like to think of myself as "smart" and I have an ***, so I guess no one likes me!

BTW, I'd like to thank you for giving me my new signature. I kind of liked it so I think I'll stick with it (see below.)

 

[NateO]

armando, check out the MS MVP Faq:

http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=fh;EN-US;mvpfaqs

As I understand, MS moniters this site, not sure as to what extent... But I think you pretty much need to post in the News Groups.

Interesting title concept/logic Ponsonby. Edit: I see you've addressed my question. Kind of a negative slant...

 

[Legacy 12630]

Interesting title concept/logic Ponsonby. I'm somewhat afraid to ask, but what the hell, what would the others be? Flip the less to more, or L becomes M I suppose...

No, there's no flipping of less, more, L, M or anything else.
I'm afraid that you've missed the brilliance of the logic involved in the suggestion.

As stated in my previous post, the "others" (i.e. in the sense of those posters other than the persons with the present MVP title) would each be "An appointed member of the group of posters who are deemed to carry marginally less clout than the other idiots" (or AAMOTGOPWADTCMLCTTOI for short).

The brilliance of this is that the shortened version is the same as the shotened version for the suggested title to replace the present MVP classification - thus saving administrative time and effort.

I'm surprised that nobody has suggested this before.

 

[NateO]

As stated in my previous post, the "others" (i.e. in the sense of those posters other than the persons with the present MVP title) would each be "An appointed member of the group of posters who are deemed to carry marginally less clout than the other idiots" (or AAMOTGOPWADTCMLCTTOI for short).

Yes, see me my edit, I originally missed your contribution. And as I thought about it, simply flipping l to m doesn't necessarily follow, I had over simplified the issue. But a truly logical combination would be a pure inverse, where it would be more likely than the other group which is less likely, i.e.,

AAMOTGOPWADTCMMCTAAMOTGOPWADTCMLCTTOI

I'm surprised that nobody has suggested this before.

Mind boggling eh.

 

[Todd Bardoni]

... it is not possible to have more than one Most Valuble Poster.

Unless of course its used in the superlative, in which case makes perfect sense.

No, there's no flipping of less, more, L, M or anything else.
I'm afraid that you've missed the brilliance of the logic involved in the suggestion.

As stated in my previous post, the "others" (i.e. in the sense of those posters other than the persons with the present MVP title) would each be "An appointed member of the group of posters who are deemed to carry marginally less clout than the other idiots" (or AAMOTGOPWADTCMLCTTOI for short).

The brilliance of this is that the shortened version is the same as the shotened version for the suggested title to replace the present MVP classification - thus saving administrative time and effort.

I'm surprised that nobody has suggested this before.

Your intellect is truly dizzying. I feel I need to lie down for a while.

 

[Legacy 12630]

... it is not possible to have more than one Most Valuble Poster.

Unless of course its used in the superlative
[/qoute]

But that is precisely why it would be more impossible and more unique to have more than one most of anything.

Your intellect is truly dizzying.

Thank you.
I'm surprised that nobody has suggested this before.

 

[Todd Bardoni]

But that is precisely why it would be more impossible and more unique to have more than one most of anything.

I think I'm going to toss my cookies....

 

[Legacy 12630]

But that is precisely why it would be more impossible and more unique to have more than one most of anything.]

I think I'm going to toss my cookies....

Not in public, I hope.