I've see this post on Jamie Cansdale's blog where he announces that its MVP status is not been renewed by Microsoft because his community participation rate over the past year is well below the required level.
Obviously, his post has launched a big number of considerations: what are the MVP criteria? Are they so right? Is the MVP title so important? Is important to know a good lead in order to become an MVP?
The MVP title is obviously an important honour that Microsoft gives to people that must have a main requirement (as you can read on the Microsoft's MVP site): they must be active on the community and give a good contribute to it.
Too many times there's a wrong consideration of the MVP title I think. The MVP title is not for a people that has done a great work or a great project in his life or that it's a genious of coding. An MVP is a people that contributes a lot on a community by helping people, answering questions on forums, teaching for free etc. It must be a people involved on a lot of activites FOR the community.
Obviously, we can talk infinitely about how an MVP is awarded (I don't think that the number of contributes that a people do for a community could be the only one requirement, but we have to consider also the quality of his work in general) but we can't criticize Microsoft for its MVP choice (although I can agree to some people that says that knowing a good internal lead could be important to have the title).
Jamie Cansdale will be always a great people and a great coder also without the MVP award. It's not this title that makes a great developer.
Don't be afraid Jamie, the community is able to recognize your honours, also without the blue logo on your blog... 