title: Naming conventions for private members of .NET types
body: <p>Normally when I have a private field inside a class or a struct, I use camelCasing, so it would be obvious that it's indeed private when you see the name of it, but in some of my colleagues' C# code, I see that they use <code>m_</code> mostly or sometimes <code>_</code>, like there is some sort of convention.</p>
  
  <p>Aren't .NET naming conventions prevent you from using underscores for member names?</p>
  
  <p>And when you mention the MS naming conventions or what not, they tell you theirs is the best way, but don't explain the reasoning behind it.</p>
  
  <p>Also when I am the owner of some code, where I clearly use camelCasing for private members, when they have to make a minor modification to the code, they stick in their conventions instead of following whatever conventions are there.</p>
  
  <p>Is this a controversy?</p>