Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tom Davies]

Rules are relatively new in  football's history.  The original game goes way 
back before medieval times and had few or no rules, even methods of scoring was 
not consistent and some had very indistinct 'goals'.  Variants of the older 
game 
still survive in specific villages and a few towns throughout Europe.  One that 
is restricted to a set pitch rather than using the entire town is played 
between 
prisoners released for the day and is more of a boxing match between various 
groups of players, no gloves.

In pool halls and pubs the players often agree to which set of rules apply 
before the game.  Same with poker, backgammon, even chess has many variants.  
Rules that are too rigid, inflexible and fail to take into account what people 
commonly do will often found to be broken and re-written later.  


Just because something is written as a rule now does not mean that it will be 
acceptable behaviour in the future (or in the past).  Smoking pot was legal 
until 1969 in the US.  Prohibition failed to stop people from drinking and was 
finally stopped.  Nowadays people seem to be encouraged to drink.  Does that 
mean drinking is good or was bad.  


I realise that people with OCD and autism often need tightly controlled 
environments and that skilled or even gifted IT people tend to have a much 
higher percentage of people with those conditions than the general population 
but people with those conditions often go in completely opposite directions of 
what they need.  So, i can see why some people would argue to restrict other 
people's use of the lists and i even think that is fairly fine on some of the 
lists but the users list is the first and only way for most new people to 
access 
help and those new people are unlikely to be familiar with bottom-posting and 
may not want to change their entire emailing system just to get an answer to 1 
quick question.  


We need to be flexible on this list.  Both top and bottom (and other) posting 
must be allowed to continue otherwise we restrict the percentage of people that 
would feel welcomed and feel like continuing to use LO.  If we don't want new 
users and want to make people feel uneasy and unwelcome then fine, insist on 
bottom posting.  


Regards from
Tom :)





From: toki 
To: users@libreoffice.org
Sent: Wed, 1 June, 2011 0:21:49
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 30/05/2011 21:42, Sigrid Carrera wrote:

> If you're going to a football match, you do obey the rules for the game, you 
>don't make up your own rules,

Supposedly, both rugby and Australian rules football got started that way.

jonathon
- -- 
If Bing copied Google, there wouldn't be anything new worth requesting.

If Bing did not copy Google, there wouldn't be anything relevant worth
requesting.

  DaveJakeman 20110207 Groklaw.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJN5XgNAAoJEERA7YuLpVrVmRgH/1vwFpNSMi2a30QHyCrU4QQj
tRgZynIJbfsJv9JTXSEv9eFwuk0IGX25+Ct7KDWGmTPE8zWM3gWauQAPT2ewJhuS
ggRBhu9ZojETSgeFIe9jDKBkHTPt822MHLKVZ5f7i9wRTHaNUGPCfOzGaFFojBjC
DhtlII1BMKeLP6xeWnUGpI6daQwYqF5bn8H2mQIyEPnjLOSMhPDlmb4O+wyGHWof
DR2PgV3s2AAXLFYqV5W6xm+4AJP7E+MvdLX1ns0r7RpLCoUrwDDkm/CpNudG0HVJ
iEc8UozcBAs0Yxq66ZisH7Vu031jZWuA/AEFqbnaPKvcBRQRplsP9SgB6ne9XKc=
=hAmk
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[toki]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 30/05/2011 21:42, Sigrid Carrera wrote:

> If you're going to a football match, you do obey the rules for the game, you 
> don't make up your own rules,

Supposedly, both rugby and Australian rules football got started that way.

jonathon
- -- 
If Bing copied Google, there wouldn't be anything new worth requesting.

If Bing did not copy Google, there wouldn't be anything relevant worth
requesting.

  DaveJakeman 20110207 Groklaw.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJN5XgNAAoJEERA7YuLpVrVmRgH/1vwFpNSMi2a30QHyCrU4QQj
tRgZynIJbfsJv9JTXSEv9eFwuk0IGX25+Ct7KDWGmTPE8zWM3gWauQAPT2ewJhuS
ggRBhu9ZojETSgeFIe9jDKBkHTPt822MHLKVZ5f7i9wRTHaNUGPCfOzGaFFojBjC
DhtlII1BMKeLP6xeWnUGpI6daQwYqF5bn8H2mQIyEPnjLOSMhPDlmb4O+wyGHWof
DR2PgV3s2AAXLFYqV5W6xm+4AJP7E+MvdLX1ns0r7RpLCoUrwDDkm/CpNudG0HVJ
iEc8UozcBAs0Yxq66ZisH7Vu031jZWuA/AEFqbnaPKvcBRQRplsP9SgB6ne9XKc=
=hAmk
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[toki]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 30/05/2011 13:58, Roland Hughes wrote:

> Professional IT workers never remove any portion of the post because
> when you go through a SOX audit, and then through court, you get in a
> whole lot of trouble for doing it.

For a SOX audit the important thing is that the emails are available as
they were _ORIGINALLY_ sent. It does not matter one iota if the emails
are top posted, bottom posted, intermixed, or none of the message being
responded to is quoted.

If your firm takes to editing emails after they were sent, then they
ought to fail SOX Audit.

Courts are more concerned about the sequence that messages were sent,
and their contents, than whether top posting, bottom posting, intermixed
quoting, or nothing was used.

When courts have looked at the quoting practices of an individual, it
usually is triggered by a change in quoting practices. A change that may
have been the result of tampering with emails after they were sent.

> working on multi-million dollar projects for Fortunate 500 companies.

a) Microsoft is a Fortune 500 company;

b) For at least three decades, the professional IT consensus has been to
quote _only_ the appropriate text. That is the text that one is directly
responding to.

> There is a long drawn out history of people deleting what they didn't
read then denying things were said.

That sounds you are talking about deleting content _after_ the email was
sent, not before it was sent.

There are no legal barriers to deleting content prior to sending the
message.  There are a number of legal objections to deleting content
after sending the messages. Objections that can, in some instances,
result in gaol time.

> Full quoting is a policy mandated by most major corporations

Gomma gama. Gomma gama.

> because it allows management (and the legal team) to jump into the 
> conversation at any point.

If an email suggests doing something that is a clear violation of the
law of the land, then legal might jump in, without looking at any other
messages in the thread. Even then, legal should limit itself to saying:
"Proposal x goes against company policy". Even under those
circumstances,legal should review the entire thread before posting
anything. In all other cases, legal should review the entire thread,
before engaging the message thread.

jonathon

I am not a lawyer.  This is not legal advice.
- -- 
If Bing copied Google, there wouldn't be anything new worth requesting.

If Bing did not copy Google, there wouldn't be anything relevant worth
requesting.

  DaveJakeman 20110207 Groklaw.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJN5XYMAAoJEERA7YuLpVrVN7EH/11LOtAYR2NeQ5GJ1ycAKgRm
mJwR2pWQF1OkjrYulGVhQqWSgQdZ0MiTLo676rC22yQcefzuHWS9X3hl6b0oRy+u
IjqYfLMcnBjEWLR+OY47BkG/xOuzF+xPseGB9M1T5OqcN0hCASG8YHsuZTABT7mt
v36LxiT2ZdkOsLD2qxHImqnSH2Bno5ulxOg+8CC7052lUp7jTfOWp7DnrZLiY6ot
sjBB1q9PqyetKczXRYRx3lmJ1nDvNNsLf6MD1mCVfrMCYu4RrzyspnoPgSjI04KV
q9my6zsGuLKdohOSIIZ2YxA5iXzMWmWFCIu1VJKjOGfJX/BHydNKJgCmc1iYN5c=
=jx4p
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Gene Young]

On 5/31/2011 10:09 AM, Roland Hughes wrote:

Richard,

Specifying Tanstaafl  messages as junk/spam
ON THE EMAIL SERVER will stop them from ever being downloaded!

Roland



As it will for rol...@logikalsolutions.com.

PLONK

--
Gene Young

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

RE: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Roland Hughes]

Richard,

Specifying Tanstaafl  messages as junk/spam
ON THE EMAIL SERVER will stop them from ever being downloaded!

Roland

On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 18:19 -0400, Richard wrote:

> Thanks.
> I do have a way to specify these messages as JUNK, and not even open them, 
> BUT, they are still downloaded before being rejected as junk, so I get all 
> this garbage going thru my system before the being dumped into the trash. 
> $*#@*&*
> You get the idea.
> Thanks for your input, Roland.
> Richard
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Roland Hughes [mailto:rol...@logikalsolutions.com] 
> Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 4:23 PM
> To: users@libreoffice.org
> Subject: RE: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken
> 
> Richard,
> 
> If actual IT professionals set up the server correctly, you send a
> COMPLETELY EMPTY MESSAGE to users+h...@libreoffice.org
> 
> No SIG files, no subject, no message body.
> 
> Given the organization of the Web site, and those genetic miss-fits from
> management that hang out here and speak directly out their rectal
> orifice without even the tiniest shred of knowledge...I would not be
> surprised to find out that doesn't work either.
> 
> Management = genetic miss-fits promoted to their level of inability.
> 
> Of course, you email system ought to provide a Web interface.  Open your
> browser without your email client being opened and go to that Web page.
> Find messages from 
> 
> Tanstaafl 
> 
> and flag them as junk mail.  Do this on the server via the Web interface
> and it will stop gigs of useless bits from attempting to come down your
> dial up connection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 13:31 -0400, Richard wrote:
> 
> > HELP!!!
> > I am receiving 20 and more emails daily. I have tried many, many times to 
> > unsubscribe with NO SUCCESS.
> > PLEASE give me an email, land line, snail mail address, or phone number 
> > where I can UNSUBSCRIBE.
> > 
> > rich...@hornick.us
> > 
> > -Original Message-----
> > From: Joep L. Blom [mailto:jlb...@neuroweave.nl] 
> > Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 11:19 AM
> > To: users@libreoffice.org
> > Cc: Roland Hughes
> > Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken
> > 
> > On 30/05/11 15:58, Roland Hughes wrote:
> > > Joep,
> > >
> > > Professional IT workers never remove any portion of the post because
> > > when you go through a SOX audit, and then through court, you get in a
> > > whole lot of trouble for doing it.
> > >
> > > Now, people who once got paid for writing a program or use Microsoft
> > > products may well have different opinions  since their not the ones
> > > working on multi-million dollar projects for Fortunate 500 companies.
> > >
> > > There is a long drawn out history of people deleting what they didn't
> > > read then denying things were said.
> > >
> > > Bottom posting wastes vast quantities of developers time scrolling to
> > > the end.  Full quoting is a policy mandated by most major corporations
> > > and IT organizations because it allows management (and the legal team)
> > > to jump into the conversation at any point.
> > >
> > > I wouldn't even be on this list had the Web site been designed by
> > > software professionals instead of whoever was used.
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 12:05 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 30/05/11 08:45, Roland Hughes wrote:
> > >>> Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by professional
> > >>> IT workers.  Microsoft developers yes, but not professionals.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Sigh! Roland your remark is utter nonsens. Many lists courteously
> > >> request to bottom post but also request clipping. Professional IT
> > >> workers remove unnecessary wording from replies and adhere to
> > >> courteously requested rules.
> > >> Joep
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > Roland,
> > Permit me to disagree. If you need E-mails for court representation it 
> > is best to furnish the original E-mails not the parts of text in answers 
> > to E-mails. You answer the relevant portions of an E-mail as the 
> > originator has the original text. I don't think a court will accept the 
> > umptieth repeat of an original E-mail. But I live in the Netherlands and 
> > I have no idea how convoluted American lawyers and justices actually 
> > reason. Well, that 

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-05-30 6:08 PM, Tom Davies wrote:
> If rules are set-up to alienate new users then i think they are worth
> ignoring.

Your attitude is why many people look on your posts with disdain, Tom.

It also sets up a false premise.

The rule is not set up to alienate new users, and as long as people are
simply *and* *politely* pointed to the rules, new users should *not* be
offended when this is pointed out to them, and the vast majority *would*
not be offended - exceptions being people like you...

> It is not acceptable to blindly follow orders or rules that cause
> harm or are ridiculous.

Another false premise... the posting guidelines do not cause harm and
are not ridiculous - in fact, when properly followed, they cause
*goodness*...

What *is* ridiculous and *does* cause harm is when people intentionally
misrepresent them in order to support their own predilection for
laziness - like you have been doing since this subject first came up.

> If TDF set a rule that said that all users must walk backwards would
> you obey it? Would you berate people that didn't follow it?

No, and no, but of course, your comparison is about as appropriate as
comparing someone who kills a mosquito that is pestering them to a child
rapist/murderer.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

RE: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Richard]

Thanks.
I do have a way to specify these messages as JUNK, and not even open them, BUT, 
they are still downloaded before being rejected as junk, so I get all this 
garbage going thru my system before the being dumped into the trash. $*#@*&*
You get the idea.
Thanks for your input, Roland.
Richard

-Original Message-
From: Roland Hughes [mailto:rol...@logikalsolutions.com] 
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 4:23 PM
To: users@libreoffice.org
Subject: RE: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

Richard,

If actual IT professionals set up the server correctly, you send a
COMPLETELY EMPTY MESSAGE to users+h...@libreoffice.org

No SIG files, no subject, no message body.

Given the organization of the Web site, and those genetic miss-fits from
management that hang out here and speak directly out their rectal
orifice without even the tiniest shred of knowledge...I would not be
surprised to find out that doesn't work either.

Management = genetic miss-fits promoted to their level of inability.

Of course, you email system ought to provide a Web interface.  Open your
browser without your email client being opened and go to that Web page.
Find messages from 

Tanstaafl 

and flag them as junk mail.  Do this on the server via the Web interface
and it will stop gigs of useless bits from attempting to come down your
dial up connection.




On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 13:31 -0400, Richard wrote:

> HELP!!!
> I am receiving 20 and more emails daily. I have tried many, many times to 
> unsubscribe with NO SUCCESS.
> PLEASE give me an email, land line, snail mail address, or phone number where 
> I can UNSUBSCRIBE.
> 
> rich...@hornick.us
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Joep L. Blom [mailto:jlb...@neuroweave.nl] 
> Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 11:19 AM
> To: users@libreoffice.org
> Cc: Roland Hughes
> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken
> 
> On 30/05/11 15:58, Roland Hughes wrote:
> > Joep,
> >
> > Professional IT workers never remove any portion of the post because
> > when you go through a SOX audit, and then through court, you get in a
> > whole lot of trouble for doing it.
> >
> > Now, people who once got paid for writing a program or use Microsoft
> > products may well have different opinions  since their not the ones
> > working on multi-million dollar projects for Fortunate 500 companies.
> >
> > There is a long drawn out history of people deleting what they didn't
> > read then denying things were said.
> >
> > Bottom posting wastes vast quantities of developers time scrolling to
> > the end.  Full quoting is a policy mandated by most major corporations
> > and IT organizations because it allows management (and the legal team)
> > to jump into the conversation at any point.
> >
> > I wouldn't even be on this list had the Web site been designed by
> > software professionals instead of whoever was used.
> >
> > On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 12:05 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:
> >
> >> On 30/05/11 08:45, Roland Hughes wrote:
> >>> Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by professional
> >>> IT workers.  Microsoft developers yes, but not professionals.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Sigh! Roland your remark is utter nonsens. Many lists courteously
> >> request to bottom post but also request clipping. Professional IT
> >> workers remove unnecessary wording from replies and adhere to
> >> courteously requested rules.
> >> Joep
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> Roland,
> Permit me to disagree. If you need E-mails for court representation it 
> is best to furnish the original E-mails not the parts of text in answers 
> to E-mails. You answer the relevant portions of an E-mail as the 
> originator has the original text. I don't think a court will accept the 
> umptieth repeat of an original E-mail. But I live in the Netherlands and 
> I have no idea how convoluted American lawyers and justices actually 
> reason. Well, that goes for Dutch members of that kind also. It is a 
> breed that I, as a simple scientist, not understand so therefore your 
> reasoning might be right.
> Joep
> 
> 
> -- 
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
> 
> 


-- 
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net

No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
reserves.

--

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Stefan Weigel]

Hi,

Am 30.05.2011 23:42, schrieb Sigrid Carrera:

> In your office, you can do as you want. But on this list, we have
> a set of rules, that everyone should take into account. And one
> of this rules, is to not top post, but reply *below* the
> paragraph your referring to and deleting the stuff, you're not
> replying.
> 
> Not doing this shows only your ignorance.

+1

Stefan


-- 
LibreOffice - Die Freiheit nehm' ich mir!

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

RE: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

I think they are called guidelines for a reason.

It would be good if we weren't so bureaucratic about this.

There is a difference between engaging in a conversation that works for the 
participants and providing some sort of linear record that requires people to 
work hard to make sure they have found everything.

Also, as you may notice, many of us use mail tools that do not "quote" lines of 
previous messages.

I do agree that the current ranting is not useful.  These debates have been  
going on for years and there is no truth to any way of doing it.  

 - Dennis

PS: The legalese is also silly when we are talking about threads on 
distribution lists, because the archive knows all.

-Original Message-
From: Sigrid Carrera [mailto:sigrid.carr...@googlemail.com] 
<http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/msg05963.html>
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 14:43
To: users@libreoffice.org
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[ ... ]

In your office, you can do as you want. But on this list, we have a set of 
rules, that everyone should take into account. And one of this rules, is to not 
top post, but reply *below* the paragraph your referring to and deleting the 
stuff, you're not replying. 

[ ... ]

Sigrid

PS: Btw, if you don't believe me, just have a look at the footer of the list: 

> Posting guidelines + more: 
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette

So you can refer to the guidelines anytime you want. 



-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tom Davies]

Hi :)
If rules are set-up to alienate new users then i think they are worth ignoring. 
 
It is not acceptable to blindly follow orders or rules that cause harm or are 
ridiculous.  If TDF set a rule that said that all users must walk backwards 
would you obey it?  Would you berate people that didn't follow it?  

Regards from
Tom :)





From: Sigrid Carrera 
To: users@libreoffice.org
Sent: Mon, 30 May, 2011 22:42:47
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

Hi, 

On Mon, 30 May 2011 14:05:56 -0500
Roland Hughes  wrote:

> You have just demonstrated a complete lack of understanding about IT and
> have __obviously__ never ever found yourself in the middle of a
> multi-million dollar lawsuit between two massive corporations.  If you
> had you would never speak so far out your rectal orifice in public.  I
> have been in that situation and my side won, not just some counts, ALL
> counts.  For the most part the other side lost because they "edited and
> middle posted" in their emails so when placed on the stand had to work
> from memory because the email they had in their hand was missing
> everything damning.

In your office, you can do as you want. But on this list, we have a set of 
rules, that everyone should take into account. And one of this rules, is to not 
top post, but reply *below* the paragraph your referring to and deleting the 
stuff, you're not replying. 


Not doing this shows only your ignorance. 

If you're going to a football match, you do obey the rules for the game, you 
don't make up your own rules, or? So please, do us the favour and use the 
rules, 
that this group has given itself. And please spare us with such anecdotes - it 
doesn't matter here. 


Thank you. 

Sigrid

PS: Btw, if you don't believe me, just have a look at the footer of the list: 

> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette

So you can refer to the guidelines anytime you want. 

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Sigrid Carrera]

Roland, 

On Mon, 30 May 2011 15:22:44 -0500
Roland Hughes  wrote:

> Richard,
> 
> If actual IT professionals set up the server correctly, you send a
> COMPLETELY EMPTY MESSAGE to users+h...@libreoffice.org
> 
> No SIG files, no subject, no message body.
> 
> Given the organization of the Web site, and those genetic miss-fits from
> management that hang out here and speak directly out their rectal
> orifice without even the tiniest shred of knowledge...I would not be
> surprised to find out that doesn't work either.
> 
> Management = genetic miss-fits promoted to their level of inability.
> 
> Of course, you email system ought to provide a Web interface.  Open your
> browser without your email client being opened and go to that Web page.
> Find messages from 
> 
> Tanstaafl 
> 
> and flag them as junk mail.  Do this on the server via the Web interface
> and it will stop gigs of useless bits from attempting to come down your
> dial up connection.

I think that went too far. I don't call you an idiot or ignorant. I think an 
apology is in place. Or, if you don't want to do this, then go your way and 
leave us here. We don't need you to insult the users here on this list. Users, 
that have a great history of helping others. 

Sigrid


[unnecessary quote removed]

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Sigrid Carrera]

Hi, 

On Mon, 30 May 2011 14:05:56 -0500
Roland Hughes  wrote:

> You have just demonstrated a complete lack of understanding about IT and
> have __obviously__ never ever found yourself in the middle of a
> multi-million dollar lawsuit between two massive corporations.  If you
> had you would never speak so far out your rectal orifice in public.  I
> have been in that situation and my side won, not just some counts, ALL
> counts.  For the most part the other side lost because they "edited and
> middle posted" in their emails so when placed on the stand had to work
> from memory because the email they had in their hand was missing
> everything damning.

In your office, you can do as you want. But on this list, we have a set of 
rules, that everyone should take into account. And one of this rules, is to not 
top post, but reply *below* the paragraph your referring to and deleting the 
stuff, you're not replying. 

Not doing this shows only your ignorance. 

If you're going to a football match, you do obey the rules for the game, you 
don't make up your own rules, or? So please, do us the favour and use the 
rules, that this group has given itself. And please spare us with such 
anecdotes - it doesn't matter here. 

Thank you. 

Sigrid

PS: Btw, if you don't believe me, just have a look at the footer of the list: 

> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette

So you can refer to the guidelines anytime you want. 

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-05-30 5:10 PM, Tom Davies wrote:
> Wow, somewhere in there i see an admittance that it is marginally easier to 
> top-post.  At last.

I don't recall anyone ever saying it wasn't *easier*...

It is also *easier* to steal apples from your neighbors apple tree than
it is to grow your own... nbut that doesn't make it better *or* right.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tom Davies]

Wow, somewhere in there i see an admittance that it is marginally easier to 
top-post.  At last.
Regards from
Tom :)





From: Tanstaafl 
To: users@libreoffice.org
Sent: Mon, 30 May, 2011 19:54:50
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

On 2011-05-30 12:17 PM, Tom Davies wrote:
> A LOT of people top-post.  Particularly normal office workers.

Yeah, because they're typically a bunch of lazy bums...

> Most email clients seem to default to open emails at the top of the
> email.

Not sure that's true (I know Thunderbirds default is to bottom post),
but its a piss poor excuse for being a lazy sob.

> Between normal office workers this is normally the latest thing in an
> ongoing thread.  If the poor worker can't remember earlier posts then
> they just scroll down for a quick refresher.

Like I said... LAZY.

> Most normal office workers open the email, see the latest thing that
> might need a response and then just click on the reply button and
> start typing.  Done. Next email.
> 
> With bottom posting the email gets opened at some ancient history
> that is far too familiar now and might even be something completely
> unrelated.

Only if the one doing the bottom posting doesn't trim their reply. It is
actually much EASIER to read a properly formatted in-line posted
response (ala this one).

> Then the person scrolls to the bottom of the thread where all the
> signatures and notes about antivirus scans and stuff so the person
> has to scroll up a bit before reaching the relevant part.

Tom, I refuse to believe that you are truly this stupid, seeing as we
have had this conversation before, so you are obviously being
intentionally disingenuous...

As I said above, you KNOW that everyone who advocates bottom/in-line
posting does so with the understanding that the quoted text MUST be
properly trimmed to include ONLY the relevant portions needed to
maintain context.

ONLY a lazy sob like yourself would assume that no trimming would/should
take place.

> So, it's more hassle and takes longer for most office workers to do 
> bottom-posting and so they (oddly enough) opt for the much easier 
> method of top-posting.

Sure, it might take a few seconds longer to properly format a longer and
more complex reply (like this one) than just blindly clicking Reply and
top-posting, but it is much more readable, meaningful, and pleasing to
read these kinds of replies than yours.

And for short replies, it only takes me a second longer, because all I
have to do is highlight the relevant text needed to maintain context,
and then when I click reply, that is ALL that is included in the quoted
text.

If your mail client won't do that, then get a real mail client that will.

> Some people in here criticise me for not doing things the way they
> normally work.

I don't care how you work, but I do care when you purposefully and
intentionally misrepresent the case between top and bottom/in-line posting.

Please at LEAST be HONEST about it, Tom...

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-05-30 4:22 PM, Roland Hughes wrote:
> Open your browser without your email client being opened and go to
> that Web page. Find messages from

rol...@logikalsolutions.com

> and flag them as junk mail.

There fixed that for you...

And you're welcome...

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

RE: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Roland Hughes]

Richard,

If actual IT professionals set up the server correctly, you send a
COMPLETELY EMPTY MESSAGE to users+h...@libreoffice.org

No SIG files, no subject, no message body.

Given the organization of the Web site, and those genetic miss-fits from
management that hang out here and speak directly out their rectal
orifice without even the tiniest shred of knowledge...I would not be
surprised to find out that doesn't work either.

Management = genetic miss-fits promoted to their level of inability.

Of course, you email system ought to provide a Web interface.  Open your
browser without your email client being opened and go to that Web page.
Find messages from 

Tanstaafl 

and flag them as junk mail.  Do this on the server via the Web interface
and it will stop gigs of useless bits from attempting to come down your
dial up connection.




On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 13:31 -0400, Richard wrote:

> HELP!!!
> I am receiving 20 and more emails daily. I have tried many, many times to 
> unsubscribe with NO SUCCESS.
> PLEASE give me an email, land line, snail mail address, or phone number where 
> I can UNSUBSCRIBE.
> 
> rich...@hornick.us
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Joep L. Blom [mailto:jlb...@neuroweave.nl] 
> Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 11:19 AM
> To: users@libreoffice.org
> Cc: Roland Hughes
> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken
> 
> On 30/05/11 15:58, Roland Hughes wrote:
> > Joep,
> >
> > Professional IT workers never remove any portion of the post because
> > when you go through a SOX audit, and then through court, you get in a
> > whole lot of trouble for doing it.
> >
> > Now, people who once got paid for writing a program or use Microsoft
> > products may well have different opinions  since their not the ones
> > working on multi-million dollar projects for Fortunate 500 companies.
> >
> > There is a long drawn out history of people deleting what they didn't
> > read then denying things were said.
> >
> > Bottom posting wastes vast quantities of developers time scrolling to
> > the end.  Full quoting is a policy mandated by most major corporations
> > and IT organizations because it allows management (and the legal team)
> > to jump into the conversation at any point.
> >
> > I wouldn't even be on this list had the Web site been designed by
> > software professionals instead of whoever was used.
> >
> > On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 12:05 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:
> >
> >> On 30/05/11 08:45, Roland Hughes wrote:
> >>> Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by professional
> >>> IT workers.  Microsoft developers yes, but not professionals.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Sigh! Roland your remark is utter nonsens. Many lists courteously
> >> request to bottom post but also request clipping. Professional IT
> >> workers remove unnecessary wording from replies and adhere to
> >> courteously requested rules.
> >> Joep
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> Roland,
> Permit me to disagree. If you need E-mails for court representation it 
> is best to furnish the original E-mails not the parts of text in answers 
> to E-mails. You answer the relevant portions of an E-mail as the 
> originator has the original text. I don't think a court will accept the 
> umptieth repeat of an original E-mail. But I live in the Netherlands and 
> I have no idea how convoluted American lawyers and justices actually 
> reason. Well, that goes for Dutch members of that kind also. It is a 
> breed that I, as a simple scientist, not understand so therefore your 
> reasoning might be right.
> Joep
> 
> 
> -- 
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
> 
> 


-- 
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net

No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
reserves.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-05-30 3:13 PM, planas wrote:
> From what I understand, top posting is generally preferred for
> general business communication. The problem with bottom posting is
> that one must scroll done to see the answer and there is a tendency
> to edit the text, which may be unacceptable in court.

Bullcrap. All you have to do is provide the original *series* of emails,
in successive order, as they were exchanged.

Do you have any idea how trivial it is to edit the contents of an email?

> When viewing edited text one could claim the editing changed the
> meaning of the original if involved in a law suit - a very nasty
> legal issue.

I disagree - proper editing - as long as you don't actually change the
*quoted* text, and only trim out irrelevant and unnecessary text - can
actually make communication *clearer* and more concise, and *less* prone
to confusion, error or misunderstanding.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-05-30 3:05 PM, Roland Hughes wrote:
> You have just demonstrated a complete lack of understanding about IT 
> and have __obviously__ never ever found yourself in the middle of a 
> multi-million dollar lawsuit between two massive corporations.

Objection, your honor, relevancy - the one has nothing to do with the other.

> If you had you would never speak so far out your rectal orifice in 
> public. I have been in that situation and my side won, not just some 
> counts, ALL counts. For the most part the other side lost because 
> they "edited and middle posted" in their emails so when placed on
> the stand had to work from memory because the email they had in
> their hand was missing everything damning.

Then they lost because they were stupid... all they would have had to do
was have the entire exchange of emails (consisting of multiple emails).
There is absolutely *zero* need to have it all in one email.

> I won't bother responding to you.

Thank you - I waste far too much of my time already on morons like you
as it is.

> It is obvious that you are both unemployed and unemployable, having 
> no industry knowledge or experience what-so-ever.

Well, since I've been the IT Director for this company for 11+ years, I
guess your powers of observation are just about as valid/reliable as the
rest of your delusions...

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

RE: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Richard]

HELP!!!
I am receiving 20 and more emails daily. I have tried many, many times to 
unsubscribe with NO SUCCESS.
PLEASE give me an email, land line, snail mail address, or phone number where I 
can UNSUBSCRIBE.

rich...@hornick.us

-Original Message-
From: Joep L. Blom [mailto:jlb...@neuroweave.nl] 
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 11:19 AM
To: users@libreoffice.org
Cc: Roland Hughes
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

On 30/05/11 15:58, Roland Hughes wrote:
> Joep,
>
> Professional IT workers never remove any portion of the post because
> when you go through a SOX audit, and then through court, you get in a
> whole lot of trouble for doing it.
>
> Now, people who once got paid for writing a program or use Microsoft
> products may well have different opinions  since their not the ones
> working on multi-million dollar projects for Fortunate 500 companies.
>
> There is a long drawn out history of people deleting what they didn't
> read then denying things were said.
>
> Bottom posting wastes vast quantities of developers time scrolling to
> the end.  Full quoting is a policy mandated by most major corporations
> and IT organizations because it allows management (and the legal team)
> to jump into the conversation at any point.
>
> I wouldn't even be on this list had the Web site been designed by
> software professionals instead of whoever was used.
>
> On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 12:05 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:
>
>> On 30/05/11 08:45, Roland Hughes wrote:
>>> Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by professional
>>> IT workers.  Microsoft developers yes, but not professionals.
>>>
>>
>> Sigh! Roland your remark is utter nonsens. Many lists courteously
>> request to bottom post but also request clipping. Professional IT
>> workers remove unnecessary wording from replies and adhere to
>> courteously requested rules.
>> Joep
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Roland,
Permit me to disagree. If you need E-mails for court representation it 
is best to furnish the original E-mails not the parts of text in answers 
to E-mails. You answer the relevant portions of an E-mail as the 
originator has the original text. I don't think a court will accept the 
umptieth repeat of an original E-mail. But I live in the Netherlands and 
I have no idea how convoluted American lawyers and justices actually 
reason. Well, that goes for Dutch members of that kind also. It is a 
breed that I, as a simple scientist, not understand so therefore your 
reasoning might be right.
Joep


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Roland Hughes]

You have just demonstrated a complete lack of understanding about IT and
have __obviously__ never ever found yourself in the middle of a
multi-million dollar lawsuit between two massive corporations.  If you
had you would never speak so far out your rectal orifice in public.  I
have been in that situation and my side won, not just some counts, ALL
counts.  For the most part the other side lost because they "edited and
middle posted" in their emails so when placed on the stand had to work
from memory because the email they had in their hand was missing
everything damning.

I won't bother responding to you.  It is obvious that you are both
unemployed and unemployable, having no industry knowledge or experience
what-so-ever.

On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 14:56 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:

> On 2011-05-30 11:42 AM, Roland Hughes wrote:
> > Editing and/or responding within the "original message" is considered
> > tampering with evidence.
> 
> Rotflmao even harder!
> 
> Roland, where do you get this garbage? Do you make it up as you go?
> 
> > Everyone is supposed to TOP POST, not only to save developer time,
> 
> Stop it, please, my sides are hurting!
> 
> > but to allow the legal teams to read from the bottom up on the last
> > message identifying how things progressed this far.
> 
> Sorry, I don't modify my personal habits to fit the needs of Outlook
> weened lawyer drones.
> 
> The chain of evidence for legal purposes is in the ORIGINAL emails, not
> endlessly/mindlessly quoted copies of stupid email signatures and
> mindless and unenforceable legal disclaimers.
> 


-- 
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net

No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
reserves.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[planas]

Hi,

On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 10:42 -0500, Roland Hughes wrote:

> Editing and/or responding within the "original message" is considered
> tampering with evidence.  Everyone is supposed to TOP POST, not only to
> save developer time, but to allow the legal teams to read from the
> bottom up on the last message identifying how things progressed this
> far.
> 
> On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 17:19 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:
> 
> > On 30/05/11 15:58, Roland Hughes wrote:
> > > Joep,
> > >
> > > Professional IT workers never remove any portion of the post because
> > > when you go through a SOX audit, and then through court, you get in a
> > > whole lot of trouble for doing it.
> > >
> > > Now, people who once got paid for writing a program or use Microsoft
> > > products may well have different opinions  since their not the ones
> > > working on multi-million dollar projects for Fortunate 500 companies.
> > >
> > > There is a long drawn out history of people deleting what they didn't
> > > read then denying things were said.
> > >
> > > Bottom posting wastes vast quantities of developers time scrolling to
> > > the end.  Full quoting is a policy mandated by most major corporations
> > > and IT organizations because it allows management (and the legal team)
> > > to jump into the conversation at any point.
> > >
> > > I wouldn't even be on this list had the Web site been designed by
> > > software professionals instead of whoever was used.
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 12:05 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 30/05/11 08:45, Roland Hughes wrote:
> > >>> Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by professional
> > >>> IT workers.  Microsoft developers yes, but not professionals.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Sigh! Roland your remark is utter nonsens. Many lists courteously
> > >> request to bottom post but also request clipping. Professional IT
> > >> workers remove unnecessary wording from replies and adhere to
> > >> courteously requested rules.
> > >> Joep
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > Roland,
> > Permit me to disagree. If you need E-mails for court representation it 
> > is best to furnish the original E-mails not the parts of text in answers 
> > to E-mails. You answer the relevant portions of an E-mail as the 
> > originator has the original text. I don't think a court will accept the 
> > umptieth repeat of an original E-mail. But I live in the Netherlands and 
> > I have no idea how convoluted American lawyers and justices actually 
> > reason. Well, that goes for Dutch members of that kind also. It is a 
> > breed that I, as a simple scientist, not understand so therefore your 
> > reasoning might be right.
> > Joep
> > 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Roland Hughes, President
> Logikal Solutions
> (630)-205-1593
> 
> http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
> http://www.infiniteexposure.net
> 
> No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
> reserves.
> 

From what I understand, top posting is generally preferred for general
business communication. The problem with bottom posting is that one must
scroll done to see the answer and there is a tendency to edit the text,
which may be unacceptable in court. When viewing edited text one could
claim the editing changed the meaning of the original if involved in a
law suit - a very nasty legal issue.
-- 
Jay Lozier
jsloz...@gmail.com

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-05-30 2:39 PM, Roland Hughes wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 14:39 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
>> Roland, you are obviously from some other planet than I.
>>
>> In the circles I frequent, it is the exact opposite.
>>
>> It is the IT people who are most likely to know how to properly use
>> their mail client, and properly quote emails when replying.
>>
>> It is Microsoft Outlook weened drones that are most likely to be lazy
>> asses who simply cannot be bothered to learn how to properly use their
>> mail client.

> Obviously you travel in that world of "got paid to write a program 
> once" instead of the "three plus year multi-million dollar bet the
> company systems development projects." I can tell you what world I
> travel in. Remember the articles which came out in ComputerWorld and
> the other trade rags after 9/11? The ones about how the trading
> companies who used distributed OpenVMS clusters lost two of their
> sites and most of their people when the Twin Towers fell, but the
> trading system continued executing trades until the end of business
> WITHOUT LOSING A SINGLE TRANSACTION. All other companies using all
> other operating systems lost massive amounts of transactions along
> with their locations. Most of those companies did not re-open their
> doors.
>
> That's my world.  Designing and developing systems which continue
> running without error long after the humans are gone.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Your arguments in support of top posting were specious and without
merit, and this is what you come back with?

PLONK.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-05-30 11:42 AM, Roland Hughes wrote:
> Editing and/or responding within the "original message" is considered
> tampering with evidence.

Rotflmao even harder!

Roland, where do you get this garbage? Do you make it up as you go?

> Everyone is supposed to TOP POST, not only to save developer time,

Stop it, please, my sides are hurting!

> but to allow the legal teams to read from the bottom up on the last
> message identifying how things progressed this far.

Sorry, I don't modify my personal habits to fit the needs of Outlook
weened lawyer drones.

The chain of evidence for legal purposes is in the ORIGINAL emails, not
endlessly/mindlessly quoted copies of stupid email signatures and
mindless and unenforceable legal disclaimers.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-05-30 12:17 PM, Tom Davies wrote:
> A LOT of people top-post.  Particularly normal office workers.

Yeah, because they're typically a bunch of lazy bums...

> Most email clients seem to default to open emails at the top of the
> email.

Not sure that's true (I know Thunderbirds default is to bottom post),
but its a piss poor excuse for being a lazy sob.

> Between normal office workers this is normally the latest thing in an
> ongoing thread.  If the poor worker can't remember earlier posts then
> they just scroll down for a quick refresher.

Like I said... LAZY.

> Most normal office workers open the email, see the latest thing that
> might need a response and then just click on the reply button and
> start typing.  Done. Next email.
> 
> With bottom posting the email gets opened at some ancient history
> that is far too familiar now and might even be something completely
> unrelated.

Only if the one doing the bottom posting doesn't trim their reply. It is
actually much EASIER to read a properly formatted in-line posted
response (ala this one).

> Then the person scrolls to the bottom of the thread where all the
> signatures and notes about antivirus scans and stuff so the person
> has to scroll up a bit before reaching the relevant part.

Tom, I refuse to believe that you are truly this stupid, seeing as we
have had this conversation before, so you are obviously being
intentionally disingenuous...

As I said above, you KNOW that everyone who advocates bottom/in-line
posting does so with the understanding that the quoted text MUST be
properly trimmed to include ONLY the relevant portions needed to
maintain context.

ONLY a lazy sob like yourself would assume that no trimming would/should
take place.

> So, it's more hassle and takes longer for most office workers to do 
> bottom-posting and so they (oddly enough) opt for the much easier 
> method of top-posting.

Sure, it might take a few seconds longer to properly format a longer and
more complex reply (like this one) than just blindly clicking Reply and
top-posting, but it is much more readable, meaningful, and pleasing to
read these kinds of replies than yours.

And for short replies, it only takes me a second longer, because all I
have to do is highlight the relevant text needed to maintain context,
and then when I click reply, that is ALL that is included in the quoted
text.

If your mail client won't do that, then get a real mail client that will.

> Some people in here criticise me for not doing things the way they
> normally work.

I don't care how you work, but I do care when you purposefully and
intentionally misrepresent the case between top and bottom/in-line posting.

Please at LEAST be HONEST about it, Tom...

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Cor Nouws]

plino wrote (30-05-11 10:28)

I have to disagree both with you Cor and with NoOp.


You're welcome, but the archives show what happened and happens.

COr


--
 - http://nl.libreoffice.org
 - giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation -


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Roland Hughes]

Obviously you travel in that world of "got paid to write a program once"
instead of the "three plus year multi-million dollar bet the company
systems development projects."  I can tell you what world I travel in.
Remember the articles which came out in ComputerWorld and the other
trade rags after 9/11?  The ones about how the trading companies who
used distributed OpenVMS clusters lost two of their sites and most of
their people when the Twin Towers fell, but the trading system continued
executing trades until the end of business WITHOUT LOSING A SINGLE
TRANSACTION.  All other companies using all other operating systems lost
massive amounts of transactions along with their locations.  Most of
those companies did not re-open their doors.

That's my world.  Designing and developing systems which continue
running without error long after the humans are gone.

On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 14:39 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:

> On 2011-05-30 2:45 AM, Roland Hughes wrote:
> > Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by
> > professional IT workers. Microsoft developers yes, but not
> > professionals.
> 
> Rotflmao!
> 
> Roland, you are obviously from some other planet than I.
> 
> In the circles I frequent, it is the exact opposite.
> 
> It is the IT people who are most likely to know how to properly use
> their mail client, and properly quote emails when replying.
> 
> It is Microsoft Outlook weened drones that are most likely to be lazy
> asses who simply cannot be bothered to learn how to properly use their
> mail client.
> 


-- 
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net

No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
reserves.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-05-30 2:45 AM, Roland Hughes wrote:
> Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by
> professional IT workers. Microsoft developers yes, but not
> professionals.

Rotflmao!

Roland, you are obviously from some other planet than I.

In the circles I frequent, it is the exact opposite.

It is the IT people who are most likely to know how to properly use
their mail client, and properly quote emails when replying.

It is Microsoft Outlook weened drones that are most likely to be lazy
asses who simply cannot be bothered to learn how to properly use their
mail client.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tom Davies]

Lol

I guess you don't work in an office nor work with other office workers much!!  
Regards from
Tom :)




From: Simos Xenitellis 
To: users@libreoffice.org
Sent: Mon, 30 May, 2011 17:57:02
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Tom Davies  wrote:
> Hi :)
> A LOT of people top-post.  Particularly normal office workers.
>
> Most email clients seem to default to open emails at the top of the email.
> Between normal office workers this is normally the latest thing in an ongoing
> thread.  If the poor worker can't remember earlier posts then they just scroll
> down for a quick refresher.
>
> Most normal office workers open the email, see the latest thing that might 
need
> a response and then just click on the reply button and start typing.  Done.
> Next email.
>
> With bottom posting the email gets opened at some ancient history that is far
> too familiar now and might even be something completely unrelated.  Then the
> person scrolls to the bottom of the thread where all the signatures and notes
> about antivirus scans and stuff so the person has to scroll up a bit before
> reaching the relevant part.  Then click on the reply button (perhaps delete 
out
> old parts as reading through) and again scroll to the bottom, delete off all 
>the
> signatures and stuff about antivirus and disclaimers.  Then start typing.
> Done.  Next email.
>
>
> So, it's more  hassle and takes longer for most office workers to do
> bottom-posting and so they (oddly enough) opt for the much easier method of
> top-posting.
>
>
> Regardless of why they do it or how stupid they are for doing something other
> than the way YOU like to do things that is the way most office workers work. 
> Is
> the job of the users list to criticise and alienate new users?  or should we 
be
> welcoming them in and encouraging them?
>
> IF we want to alienate new users and start off by criticising them and being
> judgemental (instead of answering their questions) then bottom-posting is
> great.  Do we want to stop new people from using LO, is the aim to stop people
> from wanting to use LO?  or do 'we' want people to use it?
>
>
> Some people in here criticise me for not doing things the way they normally
> work.  I say that those that criticise me are an almost infinitesimally small
> number of people compared against the total numbers of people that use an 
>office
> suite everyday.  People that stand against top-posting in the users list 
remind
> me of  King Canute trying to stop the incoming tide.
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13524677
> It seems that at least he was wise enough to realise that the tide was
> overwhelmingly more powerful than he was.  IF we are to deal with new users 
>then
> we need to be able to cope easily with top-posters on THEIR terms, not ours.
>
>
> Regards from
> Tom :)
>
>
>
>
> 
> From: Joep L. Blom 
> To: users@libreoffice.org
> Cc: Roland Hughes 
> Sent: Mon, 30 May, 2011 16:19:09
> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken
>
> On 30/05/11 15:58, Roland Hughes wrote:
>> Joep,
>>
>> Professional IT workers never remove any portion of the post because
>> when you go through a SOX audit, and then through court, you get in a
>> whole lot of trouble for doing it.
>>
>> Now, people who once got paid for writing a program or use Microsoft
>> products may well have different opinions  since their not the ones
>> working on multi-million dollar projects for Fortunate 500 companies.
>>
>> There is a long drawn out history of people deleting what they didn't
>> read then denying things were said.
>>
>> Bottom posting wastes vast quantities of developers time scrolling to
>> the end.  Full quoting is a policy mandated by most major corporations
>> and IT organizations because it allows management (and the legal team)
>> to jump into the conversation at any point.
>>
>> I wouldn't even be on this list had the Web site been designed by
>> software professionals instead of whoever was used.
>>
>> On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 12:05 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:
>>
>>> On 30/05/11 08:45, Roland Hughes wrote:
>>>> Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by professional
>>>> IT workers.  Microsoft developers yes, but not professionals.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sigh! Roland your remark is utter nonsens. Many lists courteously
>>> request to bottom post but also request clipping. Professional IT
>>> workers remove unnecessary wording from repl

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Simos Xenitellis]

On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Tom Davies  wrote:
> Hi :)
> A LOT of people top-post.  Particularly normal office workers.
>
> Most email clients seem to default to open emails at the top of the email.
> Between normal office workers this is normally the latest thing in an ongoing
> thread.  If the poor worker can't remember earlier posts then they just scroll
> down for a quick refresher.
>
> Most normal office workers open the email, see the latest thing that might 
> need
> a response and then just click on the reply button and start typing.  Done.
> Next email.
>
> With bottom posting the email gets opened at some ancient history that is far
> too familiar now and might even be something completely unrelated.  Then the
> person scrolls to the bottom of the thread where all the signatures and notes
> about antivirus scans and stuff so the person has to scroll up a bit before
> reaching the relevant part.  Then click on the reply button (perhaps delete 
> out
> old parts as reading through) and again scroll to the bottom, delete off all 
> the
> signatures and stuff about antivirus and disclaimers.  Then start typing.
> Done.  Next email.
>
>
> So, it's more  hassle and takes longer for most office workers to do
> bottom-posting and so they (oddly enough) opt for the much easier method of
> top-posting.
>
>
> Regardless of why they do it or how stupid they are for doing something other
> than the way YOU like to do things that is the way most office workers work.  
> Is
> the job of the users list to criticise and alienate new users?  or should we 
> be
> welcoming them in and encouraging them?
>
> IF we want to alienate new users and start off by criticising them and being
> judgemental (instead of answering their questions) then bottom-posting is
> great.  Do we want to stop new people from using LO, is the aim to stop people
> from wanting to use LO?  or do 'we' want people to use it?
>
>
> Some people in here criticise me for not doing things the way they normally
> work.  I say that those that criticise me are an almost infinitesimally small
> number of people compared against the total numbers of people that use an 
> office
> suite everyday.  People that stand against top-posting in the users list 
> remind
> me of  King Canute trying to stop the incoming tide.
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13524677
> It seems that at least he was wise enough to realise that the tide was
> overwhelmingly more powerful than he was.  IF we are to deal with new users 
> then
> we need to be able to cope easily with top-posters on THEIR terms, not ours.
>
>
> Regards from
> Tom :)
>
>
>
>
> 
> From: Joep L. Blom 
> To: users@libreoffice.org
> Cc: Roland Hughes 
> Sent: Mon, 30 May, 2011 16:19:09
> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken
>
> On 30/05/11 15:58, Roland Hughes wrote:
>> Joep,
>>
>> Professional IT workers never remove any portion of the post because
>> when you go through a SOX audit, and then through court, you get in a
>> whole lot of trouble for doing it.
>>
>> Now, people who once got paid for writing a program or use Microsoft
>> products may well have different opinions  since their not the ones
>> working on multi-million dollar projects for Fortunate 500 companies.
>>
>> There is a long drawn out history of people deleting what they didn't
>> read then denying things were said.
>>
>> Bottom posting wastes vast quantities of developers time scrolling to
>> the end.  Full quoting is a policy mandated by most major corporations
>> and IT organizations because it allows management (and the legal team)
>> to jump into the conversation at any point.
>>
>> I wouldn't even be on this list had the Web site been designed by
>> software professionals instead of whoever was used.
>>
>> On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 12:05 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:
>>
>>> On 30/05/11 08:45, Roland Hughes wrote:
>>>> Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by professional
>>>> IT workers.  Microsoft developers yes, but not professionals.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sigh! Roland your remark is utter nonsens. Many lists courteously
>>> request to bottom post but also request clipping. Professional IT
>>> workers remove unnecessary wording from replies and adhere to
>>> courteously requested rules.
>>> Joep
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> Roland,
> Permit me to disagree. If you need E-mails for court representation it
> is best to furnish the original E-mails not 

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tom Davies]

Hi :)
A LOT of people top-post.  Particularly normal office workers.  

Most email clients seem to default to open emails at the top of the email.  
Between normal office workers this is normally the latest thing in an ongoing 
thread.  If the poor worker can't remember earlier posts then they just scroll 
down for a quick refresher.

Most normal office workers open the email, see the latest thing that might need 
a response and then just click on the reply button and start typing.  Done.  
Next email.

With bottom posting the email gets opened at some ancient history that is far 
too familiar now and might even be something completely unrelated.  Then the 
person scrolls to the bottom of the thread where all the signatures and notes 
about antivirus scans and stuff so the person has to scroll up a bit before 
reaching the relevant part.  Then click on the reply button (perhaps delete out 
old parts as reading through) and again scroll to the bottom, delete off all 
the 
signatures and stuff about antivirus and disclaimers.  Then start typing.  
Done.  Next email.  


So, it's more  hassle and takes longer for most office workers to do 
bottom-posting and so they (oddly enough) opt for the much easier method of 
top-posting.  


Regardless of why they do it or how stupid they are for doing something other 
than the way YOU like to do things that is the way most office workers work.  
Is 
the job of the users list to criticise and alienate new users?  or should we be 
welcoming them in and encouraging them?

IF we want to alienate new users and start off by criticising them and being 
judgemental (instead of answering their questions) then bottom-posting is 
great.  Do we want to stop new people from using LO, is the aim to stop people 
from wanting to use LO?  or do 'we' want people to use it?  


Some people in here criticise me for not doing things the way they normally 
work.  I say that those that criticise me are an almost infinitesimally small 
number of people compared against the total numbers of people that use an 
office 
suite everyday.  People that stand against top-posting in the users list remind 
me of  King Canute trying to stop the incoming tide.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13524677
It seems that at least he was wise enough to realise that the tide was 
overwhelmingly more powerful than he was.  IF we are to deal with new users 
then 
we need to be able to cope easily with top-posters on THEIR terms, not ours.  


Regards from
Tom :)





From: Joep L. Blom 
To: users@libreoffice.org
Cc: Roland Hughes 
Sent: Mon, 30 May, 2011 16:19:09
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

On 30/05/11 15:58, Roland Hughes wrote:
> Joep,
>
> Professional IT workers never remove any portion of the post because
> when you go through a SOX audit, and then through court, you get in a
> whole lot of trouble for doing it.
>
> Now, people who once got paid for writing a program or use Microsoft
> products may well have different opinions  since their not the ones
> working on multi-million dollar projects for Fortunate 500 companies.
>
> There is a long drawn out history of people deleting what they didn't
> read then denying things were said.
>
> Bottom posting wastes vast quantities of developers time scrolling to
> the end.  Full quoting is a policy mandated by most major corporations
> and IT organizations because it allows management (and the legal team)
> to jump into the conversation at any point.
>
> I wouldn't even be on this list had the Web site been designed by
> software professionals instead of whoever was used.
>
> On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 12:05 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:
>
>> On 30/05/11 08:45, Roland Hughes wrote:
>>> Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by professional
>>> IT workers.  Microsoft developers yes, but not professionals.
>>>
>>
>> Sigh! Roland your remark is utter nonsens. Many lists courteously
>> request to bottom post but also request clipping. Professional IT
>> workers remove unnecessary wording from replies and adhere to
>> courteously requested rules.
>> Joep
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Roland,
Permit me to disagree. If you need E-mails for court representation it 
is best to furnish the original E-mails not the parts of text in answers 
to E-mails. You answer the relevant portions of an E-mail as the 
originator has the original text. I don't think a court will accept the 
umptieth repeat of an original E-mail. But I live in the Netherlands and 
I have no idea how convoluted American lawyers and justices actually 
reason. Well, that goes for Dutch members of that kind also. It is a 
breed that I, as a simple scientist, not understand so therefore your 
reasoning might be right.
Joep


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions:

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Roland Hughes]

I don't know if you are having difficulties with your mail client, but
your recent responses seem to be double posting.

On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 17:19 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:

> On 30/05/11 15:58, Roland Hughes wrote:
> > Joep,
> >
> > Professional IT workers never remove any portion of the post because
> > when you go through a SOX audit, and then through court, you get in a
> > whole lot of trouble for doing it.
> >
> > Now, people who once got paid for writing a program or use Microsoft
> > products may well have different opinions  since their not the ones
> > working on multi-million dollar projects for Fortunate 500 companies.
> >
> > There is a long drawn out history of people deleting what they didn't
> > read then denying things were said.
> >
> > Bottom posting wastes vast quantities of developers time scrolling to
> > the end.  Full quoting is a policy mandated by most major corporations
> > and IT organizations because it allows management (and the legal team)
> > to jump into the conversation at any point.
> >
> > I wouldn't even be on this list had the Web site been designed by
> > software professionals instead of whoever was used.
> >
> > On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 12:05 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:
> >
> >> On 30/05/11 08:45, Roland Hughes wrote:
> >>> Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by professional
> >>> IT workers.  Microsoft developers yes, but not professionals.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Sigh! Roland your remark is utter nonsens. Many lists courteously
> >> request to bottom post but also request clipping. Professional IT
> >> workers remove unnecessary wording from replies and adhere to
> >> courteously requested rules.
> >> Joep
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> Roland,
> Permit me to disagree. If you need E-mails for court representation it 
> is best to furnish the original E-mails not the parts of text in answers 
> to E-mails. You answer the relevant portions of an E-mail as the 
> originator has the original text. I don't think a court will accept the 
> umptieth repeat of an original E-mail. But I live in the Netherlands and 
> I have no idea how convoluted American lawyers and justices actually 
> reason. Well, that goes for Dutch members of that kind also. It is a 
> breed that I, as a simple scientist, not understand so therefore your 
> reasoning might be right.
> Joep
> 
> 


-- 
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net

No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
reserves.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Roland Hughes]

Editing and/or responding within the "original message" is considered
tampering with evidence.  Everyone is supposed to TOP POST, not only to
save developer time, but to allow the legal teams to read from the
bottom up on the last message identifying how things progressed this
far.

On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 17:19 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:

> On 30/05/11 15:58, Roland Hughes wrote:
> > Joep,
> >
> > Professional IT workers never remove any portion of the post because
> > when you go through a SOX audit, and then through court, you get in a
> > whole lot of trouble for doing it.
> >
> > Now, people who once got paid for writing a program or use Microsoft
> > products may well have different opinions  since their not the ones
> > working on multi-million dollar projects for Fortunate 500 companies.
> >
> > There is a long drawn out history of people deleting what they didn't
> > read then denying things were said.
> >
> > Bottom posting wastes vast quantities of developers time scrolling to
> > the end.  Full quoting is a policy mandated by most major corporations
> > and IT organizations because it allows management (and the legal team)
> > to jump into the conversation at any point.
> >
> > I wouldn't even be on this list had the Web site been designed by
> > software professionals instead of whoever was used.
> >
> > On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 12:05 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:
> >
> >> On 30/05/11 08:45, Roland Hughes wrote:
> >>> Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by professional
> >>> IT workers.  Microsoft developers yes, but not professionals.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Sigh! Roland your remark is utter nonsens. Many lists courteously
> >> request to bottom post but also request clipping. Professional IT
> >> workers remove unnecessary wording from replies and adhere to
> >> courteously requested rules.
> >> Joep
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> Roland,
> Permit me to disagree. If you need E-mails for court representation it 
> is best to furnish the original E-mails not the parts of text in answers 
> to E-mails. You answer the relevant portions of an E-mail as the 
> originator has the original text. I don't think a court will accept the 
> umptieth repeat of an original E-mail. But I live in the Netherlands and 
> I have no idea how convoluted American lawyers and justices actually 
> reason. Well, that goes for Dutch members of that kind also. It is a 
> breed that I, as a simple scientist, not understand so therefore your 
> reasoning might be right.
> Joep
> 


-- 
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net

No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
reserves.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Joep L. Blom]

On 30/05/11 15:58, Roland Hughes wrote:

Joep,

Professional IT workers never remove any portion of the post because
when you go through a SOX audit, and then through court, you get in a
whole lot of trouble for doing it.

Now, people who once got paid for writing a program or use Microsoft
products may well have different opinions  since their not the ones
working on multi-million dollar projects for Fortunate 500 companies.

There is a long drawn out history of people deleting what they didn't
read then denying things were said.

Bottom posting wastes vast quantities of developers time scrolling to
the end.  Full quoting is a policy mandated by most major corporations
and IT organizations because it allows management (and the legal team)
to jump into the conversation at any point.

I wouldn't even be on this list had the Web site been designed by
software professionals instead of whoever was used.

On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 12:05 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:


On 30/05/11 08:45, Roland Hughes wrote:

Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by professional
IT workers.  Microsoft developers yes, but not professionals.



Sigh! Roland your remark is utter nonsens. Many lists courteously
request to bottom post but also request clipping. Professional IT
workers remove unnecessary wording from replies and adhere to
courteously requested rules.
Joep







Roland,
Permit me to disagree. If you need E-mails for court representation it 
is best to furnish the original E-mails not the parts of text in answers 
to E-mails. You answer the relevant portions of an E-mail as the 
originator has the original text. I don't think a court will accept the 
umptieth repeat of an original E-mail. But I live in the Netherlands and 
I have no idea how convoluted American lawyers and justices actually 
reason. Well, that goes for Dutch members of that kind also. It is a 
breed that I, as a simple scientist, not understand so therefore your 
reasoning might be right.

Joep


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Roland Hughes]

Joep,

Professional IT workers never remove any portion of the post because
when you go through a SOX audit, and then through court, you get in a
whole lot of trouble for doing it.

Now, people who once got paid for writing a program or use Microsoft
products may well have different opinions  since their not the ones
working on multi-million dollar projects for Fortunate 500 companies.

There is a long drawn out history of people deleting what they didn't
read then denying things were said.

Bottom posting wastes vast quantities of developers time scrolling to
the end.  Full quoting is a policy mandated by most major corporations
and IT organizations because it allows management (and the legal team)
to jump into the conversation at any point.

I wouldn't even be on this list had the Web site been designed by
software professionals instead of whoever was used.

On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 12:05 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:

> On 30/05/11 08:45, Roland Hughes wrote:
> > Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by professional
> > IT workers.  Microsoft developers yes, but not professionals.
> >
> 
> Sigh! Roland your remark is utter nonsens. Many lists courteously 
> request to bottom post but also request clipping. Professional IT 
> workers remove unnecessary wording from replies and adhere to 
> courteously requested rules.
> Joep
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net

No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
reserves.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Joep L. Blom]

On 30/05/11 08:45, Roland Hughes wrote:

Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by professional
IT workers.  Microsoft developers yes, but not professionals.



Sigh! Roland your remark is utter nonsens. Many lists courteously 
request to bottom post but also request clipping. Professional IT 
workers remove unnecessary wording from replies and adhere to 
courteously requested rules.

Joep



--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[plino]

I have to disagree both with you Cor and with NoOp.

Tom is answering as a member of the community. Here is a quote from the
LibreOffice homepage "Support and documentation is free from our large,
dedicated community of users, contributors and developers."

So you see, miserable lowly human beings like Tom and myself are part of
this community when we donate part of our time and experience. And surprise,
so are the USERS :)

Unless you are saying that the SC, the members and the developers which in
your logic are the only ones that represent the community, want to have the
exclusive of answering all the questions (or to ignore them).

I think that having a sense of community is a positive thing.

Please don't antagonize people who are helping. Peace!

--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Sun-Weblog-Publisher-broken-tp2994867p3001195.html
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Roland Hughes]

Whether he does or doesn't represent LO in any official capacity really
doesn't matter to me.  "Official" presence seems to be non-existent at
best on this list and believe it or not, Tom is where I got my answer.
Had the LO Web site been designed even remotely correct for a commercial
or widely used product, the bug reporting link would have been under
Support or on the main page, not hidden at the end of a developer page,
where most users won't go...great for developers who only want to see
bugs that come with patches already hacked, not great for people that
want to post bugs.



On Sun, 2011-05-29 at 21:12 -0700, NoOp wrote:

> On 05/29/2011 08:25 PM, NoOp wrote:
> > On 05/29/2011 07:42 PM, Roland Hughes wrote:
> >> Wow!
> >> 
> >> Someone definitely peed in your cornflakes this morning!
> > 
> > Try bottom or interleaved posting some time.
> > 
> > "peed in your cornflakes"?
> > 
> > My *point* is that Tom Davies is replying to users on this list as if he
> > represents LO. New users to this list may be inclined to think that the
> > "we" in his posts are coming from some 'official' LO source.
> > 
> > If that is not obvious to you, then I suggest that you actually may have
> > actually eaten the "peed" in cornflakes & I'm happy to take this off
> > list to discuss further so that we don't bore the list otherwise.
> ...
> 
> Then again... I suppose we could all ask 'Shane' to be the LO
> spokesperson given his recent post on the LO dev list:
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net

No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
reserves.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Roland Hughes]

Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by professional
IT workers.  Microsoft developers yes, but not professionals.

On Sun, 2011-05-29 at 20:25 -0700, NoOp wrote:

> On 05/29/2011 07:42 PM, Roland Hughes wrote:
> > Wow!
> > 
> > Someone definitely peed in your cornflakes this morning!
> 
> Try bottom or interleaved posting some time.
> 
> "peed in your cornflakes"?
> 
> My *point* is that Tom Davies is replying to users on this list as if he
> represents LO. New users to this list may be inclined to think that the
> "we" in his posts are coming from some 'official' LO source.
> 
> If that is not obvious to you, then I suggest that you actually may have
> actually eaten the "peed" in cornflakes & I'm happy to take this off
> list to discuss further so that we don't bore the list otherwise.
> 
> 
> > 
> > On Sun, 2011-05-29 at 19:08 -0700, NoOp wrote:
> > 
> >> On 05/29/2011 08:09 AM, Tom Davies wrote:
> >> > Hi :)
> >> > Things are not perfect yet.  We do need people to point out faults so 
> >> > that we 
> >> > can fix them.  Of course we are going to be slightly over-sensitive to 
> >> > criticism 
> >> > when we care so much about the project but we need to get beyond that 
> >> > and just 
> >> > improve things.  What has been done so far is amazing.  
> >> 
> >> Q. What is this 'we' you speak of? Do you have a mouse in your pocket?
> >> For some reason I fail to find you on:
> >> http://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/
> >>  http://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/members/
> >> and I don't think that I've see you post code on the developers list.
> >> 
> >> Your posts containing " We do need people to point out faults", "Of
> >> course we are going to be", "when we care so much about the project",
> >> and but we need to get beyond that" imply that you are speaking for LO,
> >> or the LO community at large.
> >> 
> >> If you think you speak for the LO c(C)omunity at large; you certainly do
> >> not speak for me (no I'm not a 'member/founder/dev' & I doubt that you
> >> speak for others on this list.
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net

No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
reserves.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Cor Nouws]

NoOp wrote (30-05-11 05:25)


My *point* is that Tom Davies is replying to users on this list as if he
represents LO. New users to this list may be inclined to think that the
"we" in his posts are coming from some 'official' LO source.


Tom not only brings in confusion about who he represents, also his 
typical contribution to the list is, however friendly it looks ( :-) ... 
:-\ ) adding confusion more than a to the point reply.

And of course he still does not master his mail client.

Cor

--
 - http://nl.libreoffice.org
 - giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation -


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[NoOp]

On 05/29/2011 08:25 PM, NoOp wrote:
> On 05/29/2011 07:42 PM, Roland Hughes wrote:
>> Wow!
>> 
>> Someone definitely peed in your cornflakes this morning!
> 
> Try bottom or interleaved posting some time.
> 
> "peed in your cornflakes"?
> 
> My *point* is that Tom Davies is replying to users on this list as if he
> represents LO. New users to this list may be inclined to think that the
> "we" in his posts are coming from some 'official' LO source.
> 
> If that is not obvious to you, then I suggest that you actually may have
> actually eaten the "peed" in cornflakes & I'm happy to take this off
> list to discuss further so that we don't bore the list otherwise.
...

Then again... I suppose we could all ask 'Shane' to be the LO
spokesperson given his recent post on the LO dev list:




-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[NoOp]

On 05/29/2011 07:42 PM, Roland Hughes wrote:
> Wow!
> 
> Someone definitely peed in your cornflakes this morning!

Try bottom or interleaved posting some time.

"peed in your cornflakes"?

My *point* is that Tom Davies is replying to users on this list as if he
represents LO. New users to this list may be inclined to think that the
"we" in his posts are coming from some 'official' LO source.

If that is not obvious to you, then I suggest that you actually may have
actually eaten the "peed" in cornflakes & I'm happy to take this off
list to discuss further so that we don't bore the list otherwise.


> 
> On Sun, 2011-05-29 at 19:08 -0700, NoOp wrote:
> 
>> On 05/29/2011 08:09 AM, Tom Davies wrote:
>> > Hi :)
>> > Things are not perfect yet.  We do need people to point out faults so that 
>> > we 
>> > can fix them.  Of course we are going to be slightly over-sensitive to 
>> > criticism 
>> > when we care so much about the project but we need to get beyond that and 
>> > just 
>> > improve things.  What has been done so far is amazing.  
>> 
>> Q. What is this 'we' you speak of? Do you have a mouse in your pocket?
>> For some reason I fail to find you on:
>> http://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/
>>  http://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/members/
>> and I don't think that I've see you post code on the developers list.
>> 
>> Your posts containing " We do need people to point out faults", "Of
>> course we are going to be", "when we care so much about the project",
>> and but we need to get beyond that" imply that you are speaking for LO,
>> or the LO community at large.
>> 
>> If you think you speak for the LO c(C)omunity at large; you certainly do
>> not speak for me (no I'm not a 'member/founder/dev' & I doubt that you
>> speak for others on this list.




-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Roland Hughes]

Wow!

Someone definitely peed in your cornflakes this morning!


On Sun, 2011-05-29 at 19:08 -0700, NoOp wrote:

> On 05/29/2011 08:09 AM, Tom Davies wrote:
> > Hi :)
> > Things are not perfect yet.  We do need people to point out faults so that 
> > we 
> > can fix them.  Of course we are going to be slightly over-sensitive to 
> > criticism 
> > when we care so much about the project but we need to get beyond that and 
> > just 
> > improve things.  What has been done so far is amazing.  
> 
> Q. What is this 'we' you speak of? Do you have a mouse in your pocket?
> For some reason I fail to find you on:
> http://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/
>  http://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/members/
> and I don't think that I've see you post code on the developers list.
> 
> Your posts containing " We do need people to point out faults", "Of
> course we are going to be", "when we care so much about the project",
> and but we need to get beyond that" imply that you are speaking for LO,
> or the LO community at large.
> 
> If you think you speak for the LO c(C)omunity at large; you certainly do
> not speak for me (no I'm not a 'member/founder/dev' & I doubt that you
> speak for others on this list.
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net

No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
reserves.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[NoOp]

On 05/29/2011 08:09 AM, Tom Davies wrote:
> Hi :)
> Things are not perfect yet.  We do need people to point out faults so that we 
> can fix them.  Of course we are going to be slightly over-sensitive to 
> criticism 
> when we care so much about the project but we need to get beyond that and 
> just 
> improve things.  What has been done so far is amazing.  

Q. What is this 'we' you speak of? Do you have a mouse in your pocket?
For some reason I fail to find you on:
http://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/
 http://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/members/
and I don't think that I've see you post code on the developers list.

Your posts containing " We do need people to point out faults", "Of
course we are going to be", "when we care so much about the project",
and but we need to get beyond that" imply that you are speaking for LO,
or the LO community at large.

If you think you speak for the LO c(C)omunity at large; you certainly do
not speak for me (no I'm not a 'member/founder/dev' & I doubt that you
speak for others on this list.




-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tom Davies]

Hi :)
That would be great.  Then other packages that also use CoGrOO couild also post 
bug-reports directly to the CoGrOO part of BugZilla.  I have a feeling that it 
already works very much like that.  


I think triagers in BugZilla can move threads from one project to another 
within 
BugZilla.  Ubuntu and other projects often tend to have a down-stream 
bugs/wish-list/questions place and only bump things up to BugZilla when needed. 
 


I'm not sure about any of this so it would be interesting to know if you're 
idea 
is already the way things are meant to work.
Regards from
Tom :)





From: lcoluiggi 
To: users@libreoffice.org
Sent: Sun, 29 May, 2011 16:13:10
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

Despite being longtime user of OOo and Libo, I never report any bugs. I
think even very complicated. I think we could get something more simple
that would work from within LibreOffice.

Here in Brazil we have an example with CoGrOO Community. CoGrOO is a
grammar checker developed by students at USP (Universidade de São
Paulo). With "Cogroo Comunidade" it's possible to contribute to the
development of the extension directly from LibreOffice. Just an idea
that occurred to me now.

Regards,

Luiz Oliveira

Em 29-05-2011 11:41, Roland Hughes escreveu:
> And just how many users are going to dig that deep to find out how to
> file a bug report?
> 
> ___Most___ sites, including the original OpenOffice site, put "file bug
> report" links either on the first page OR under the Support heading.
> You didn't even have the decency to put it under "Get Help".  As a
> general rule, when the bug report page is under the Developer tree, it
> tends to be "expert friendly" requiring reports filed only by people
> working directly with the code and uploading patches for the bugs they
> find...not end users who find vicious bugs.
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, 2011-05-29 at 16:24 +0200, Sigrid Carrera wrote:
> 
>> Hi, 
>>
>> On Sun, 29 May 2011 08:28:04 -0500
>> Roland Hughes  wrote:
>>
>>> There is not a single ^TY)*(&)(*&)(ing link on the LibreOffice site to
>>> file a bug report!!1
>>
>> sorry, but you are wrong!
>> There is. 
>>
>> If you don't believe me, see for yourself: 
>> Go to libreoffice.org/get involved/Developers/File Bugs
>>
>> There is a link to bugzilla. 
>>
>> Sigrid
>>
> 
> 


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[lcoluiggi]

Despite being longtime user of OOo and Libo, I never report any bugs. I
think even very complicated. I think we could get something more simple
that would work from within LibreOffice.

Here in Brazil we have an example with CoGrOO Community. CoGrOO is a
grammar checker developed by students at USP (Universidade de São
Paulo). With "Cogroo Comunidade" it's possible to contribute to the
development of the extension directly from LibreOffice. Just an idea
that occurred to me now.

Regards,

Luiz Oliveira

Em 29-05-2011 11:41, Roland Hughes escreveu:
> And just how many users are going to dig that deep to find out how to
> file a bug report?
> 
> ___Most___ sites, including the original OpenOffice site, put "file bug
> report" links either on the first page OR under the Support heading.
> You didn't even have the decency to put it under "Get Help".  As a
> general rule, when the bug report page is under the Developer tree, it
> tends to be "expert friendly" requiring reports filed only by people
> working directly with the code and uploading patches for the bugs they
> find...not end users who find vicious bugs.
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, 2011-05-29 at 16:24 +0200, Sigrid Carrera wrote:
> 
>> Hi, 
>>
>> On Sun, 29 May 2011 08:28:04 -0500
>> Roland Hughes  wrote:
>>
>>> There is not a single ^TY)*(&)(*&)(ing link on the LibreOffice site to
>>> file a bug report!!1
>>
>> sorry, but you are wrong!
>> There is. 
>>
>> If you don't believe me, see for yourself: 
>> Go to libreoffice.org/get involved/Developers/File Bugs
>>
>> There is a link to bugzilla. 
>>
>> Sigrid
>>
> 
> 


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tom Davies]

Hi again
Sorry i should have mentioned this page for advice about posting bug-reports 
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport
and it includes this link straight to the BugZilla website
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/
Good luck and regards from
Tom :)





From: Sigrid Carrera 
To: users@libreoffice.org
Sent: Sun, 29 May, 2011 15:24:05
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

Hi, 

On Sun, 29 May 2011 08:28:04 -0500
Roland Hughes  wrote:

> There is not a single ^TY)*(&)(*&)(ing link on the LibreOffice site to
> file a bug report!!1

sorry, but you are wrong!
There is. 

If you don't believe me, see for yourself: 
Go to libreoffice.org/get involved/Developers/File Bugs

There is a link to bugzilla. 

Sigrid

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Tom Davies]

Hi :)
Things are not perfect yet.  We do need people to point out faults so that we 
can fix them.  Of course we are going to be slightly over-sensitive to 
criticism 
when we care so much about the project but we need to get beyond that and just 
improve things.  What has been done so far is amazing.  


I think this question really needs to go to the website team's mailing list but 
i am not on it.  Could someone else, perhaps Roland, talk to them about this?
Regards from
Tom :)





From: Roland Hughes 
To: users@libreoffice.org
Sent: Sun, 29 May, 2011 15:41:13
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

And just how many users are going to dig that deep to find out how to
file a bug report?

___Most___ sites, including the original OpenOffice site, put "file bug
report" links either on the first page OR under the Support heading.
You didn't even have the decency to put it under "Get Help".  As a
general rule, when the bug report page is under the Developer tree, it
tends to be "expert friendly" requiring reports filed only by people
working directly with the code and uploading patches for the bugs they
find...not end users who find vicious bugs.



On Sun, 2011-05-29 at 16:24 +0200, Sigrid Carrera wrote:

> Hi, 
> 
> On Sun, 29 May 2011 08:28:04 -0500
> Roland Hughes  wrote:
> 
> > There is not a single ^TY)*(&)(*&)(ing link on the LibreOffice site to
> > file a bug report!!1
> 
> sorry, but you are wrong!
> There is. 
> 
> If you don't believe me, see for yourself: 
> Go to libreoffice.org/get involved/Developers/File Bugs
> 
> There is a link to bugzilla. 
> 
> Sigrid
> 


-- 
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net

No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
reserves.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Roland Hughes]

And just how many users are going to dig that deep to find out how to
file a bug report?

___Most___ sites, including the original OpenOffice site, put "file bug
report" links either on the first page OR under the Support heading.
You didn't even have the decency to put it under "Get Help".  As a
general rule, when the bug report page is under the Developer tree, it
tends to be "expert friendly" requiring reports filed only by people
working directly with the code and uploading patches for the bugs they
find...not end users who find vicious bugs.



On Sun, 2011-05-29 at 16:24 +0200, Sigrid Carrera wrote:

> Hi, 
> 
> On Sun, 29 May 2011 08:28:04 -0500
> Roland Hughes  wrote:
> 
> > There is not a single ^TY)*(&)(*&)(ing link on the LibreOffice site to
> > file a bug report!!1
> 
> sorry, but you are wrong!
> There is. 
> 
> If you don't believe me, see for yourself: 
> Go to libreoffice.org/get involved/Developers/File Bugs
> 
> There is a link to bugzilla. 
> 
> Sigrid
> 


-- 
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net

No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
reserves.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Sigrid Carrera]

Hi, 

On Sun, 29 May 2011 08:28:04 -0500
Roland Hughes  wrote:

> There is not a single ^TY)*(&)(*&)(ing link on the LibreOffice site to
> file a bug report!!1

sorry, but you are wrong!
There is. 

If you don't believe me, see for yourself: 
Go to libreoffice.org/get involved/Developers/File Bugs

There is a link to bugzilla. 

Sigrid

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Roland Hughes]

There is not a single ^TY)*(&)(*&)(ing link on the LibreOffice site to
file a bug report!!1




On Sun, 2011-05-29 at 10:02 +0200, Alexander Thurgood wrote:

> Le 28/05/11 01:53, Roland Hughes a écrit :
> 
> Hi Roland,
> 
> > This plugin was one of the few reasons I bothered with OpenOffice.
> > Being able to write blog entries off-line using fonts and specific
> > layouts was awesome.  It appears absolutely nothing has been done on
> > this since 2009.  Is anybody going to pick up the ball???
> > 
> 
> I suggest you file a bug report or a feature enhancement request on
> freedesktop bugzilla - the user list is not where your question will be
> answered in all likelihood.
> 
> 
> Alex
> 
> 


-- 
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net

No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
reserves.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

[Alexander Thurgood]

Le 28/05/11 01:53, Roland Hughes a écrit :

Hi Roland,

> This plugin was one of the few reasons I bothered with OpenOffice.
> Being able to write blog entries off-line using fonts and specific
> layouts was awesome.  It appears absolutely nothing has been done on
> this since 2009.  Is anybody going to pick up the ball???
> 

I suggest you file a bug report or a feature enhancement request on
freedesktop bugzilla - the user list is not where your question will be
answered in all likelihood.


Alex


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted