Deloy Cole wrote: <---snip---> We are listening. However, we do feel like this session is an opportunity for HP to respond to the issues that have been raised on the annual Advocacy Survey that is voted on by nearly 1000 Interex and other national user group members. For HP World '98 the session has been described as: "This roundtable is the ideal venue for you to get high-level answers to your questions and hear the latest results from Interex's Worldwide Advocacy Survey of HP Computer Users. As an open forum designed to create direct dialogue between top HP managers, their customers, and prospective customers, you will be able to share your concerns regarding your relationship with HP and the future of your computing systems." The format of the HP Management Roundtable will be similar to last year in that we will be presenting a few issues from the survey and letting HP respond before we get into the pre-submitted questions and then onto the open forum. However, the amount of panelists is lower and they will be on stage for the entire session. This is the 3rd year in a row that we have had HP respond to some issues from the survey. Also, the length of time for HP to respond to the survey issues has been decreased. <---snip---> To which I respond: Last year was a lot more than "presenting a few issues from the survey and letting HP respond before we get into the pre-submitted questions ...". But even if that is all that is done this year, I would still maintain that using the face time of the MR to go over advocacy survey results is not the best use of that valuable time. Instead, may I suggest Interex prepare an article for HPWorld magazine prior to the conference which describes the survey results and HP's response. Distribute this at the conference. If anyone, including HP, wants to follow up on any of the survey issues, the MR then becomes the appropriate forum. I realize that a principle reason for moving discussion of the Advocacy Survey results to the MR was the distinct lack of interest shown when separate sessions were held on the Advocacy Survey - the couple I went to in past years could have been held in a broom closet. Interex and HP need to understand that this was a conscious decision on the part of the attendees; that perhaps they felt their time could be better spent at sessions or in the vendor area getting information that might not be readily available later on in print. I know that is how I schedule my time. It does not mean I am not interested in the Advocacy Survey results and HP's response; I just believe there is a better time and place to review them. John Burke e-mail: [log in to unmask]