MVP quality is indeed a bit random...
"I've dealt with all sorts of MVP responses when dealing with Microsoft brand issues. While I haven't experienced any evangelism I sure as hell haven't experienced anything approaching "expertise" either."
As long as everyone understands that not every MVP deals with "brand issues" on a "let me help you out with this incredibly convoluted series of posts" type of affair - I simply obtained mine because someone, somewhere in Redmond thought the security work I'd done warranted a "thank you" from them and don't actively do anything to keep the award or mess around in help groups - then I have no problem with that. It's the broad, sweeping "must be an MS fanboy / evangelist / whatever" line of thinking that seems to descend into insults in discussions such as these that I take issue with.
also, certain geographical regions now encourage people to self nominate for an award which is a *terrible* idea and a few years ago would never have happened. With policies such as that in place it's no wonder many peoples experience of MVPs isn't a particularly brilliant one, because I can guarantee that self nomination idea has probably bloated the ranks with people of questionable talents. There will always be a (very) sharp imbalance with regards MVP skills, and some will be very good and some will be terrible.
more often than not, this depends on the geographical location, which department decided to nominate, whether the person self nominated and whether the overall pool of people who do work in their specific area were actually any good to start with.