Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again

[sb73542]

Hi again,

Thanks to everyone who has expressed a balanced, objective opinion about
this.

I don't want to spend a lot time here arguing about ads. I understand that
it's a sensitive subject, I'm sorry that some people disagree, and I
respect their opinions. But I would like to mention that I don't really
have any control over the ad content, that is determined by Google. That
being said, It seems rather strange to refer to Microsoft Office as
"competition" and to show such a level of contempt toward it. I personally
do not own, use, or even like Microsoft Office. But it isn't a taboo,
shady, spammy, startup job. Like it or not, it's the industry standard
still, and will continue to be so for a long time. Irrational hatred and
attempts to obliterate all references to Microsoft or any other commercial
project are counterproductive and don't seem to agree with the free spirit
around LibreOffice. I have made a conscientious, informed, intelligent
decision to use LibreOffice instead of Microsoft Office, and no amount of
forum ads will sway me. I would hope and expect that most other users of
the forum will likewise have the presence of mind to make a rational
decision based on their own needs.

That's all for now. Thanks for reading!
Sam from LibreOfficeForum.org


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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Question about proposing the creation of a new format

[Ian Lynch]

On 26 April 2011 22:48, e-letter  wrote:

> >I think this is a very interesting issue. We are moving from the dominant
> >technologies that were designed to put information on paper to the
> dominant
> >need of presenting information on screens. With the revolution in digital
> >readers this is only going to increase and then what relevance has
> document
> >formats that are primarily designed to target hard copy output? If odf
> does
> >not adapt it will become obsolete.
> >
>
> Seems to suggest that LO should become some sort of html (or any other
> electronic format) editor?
>

Its already a sort of XML editor :-)



>I am constantly irritated by having to download pdfs, .docs and so on when
>all I want to do is view the information without cluttering up my download

 May I suggest to use the 'load url' bar to read documents directly on
> the web? As for pdf documents, evince can open directly from the url
> when activated via the command terminal
>

There are a number of reasons why this is clumsy. Ok, its a work around but
its not an elegant solution. Most people produce most of these documents
simply because they are locked into a desktop applications mentality and
don't think about what the purpose of the document really is. This isn't
going to change over night but we are clearly in a transition from desktop
being king to at least desktop a lot less important. IMHO, LO needs to be
looking several years ahead because we know how long development can take.
.

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



-- 
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications
The Schools ITQ

www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

You have received this email from the following company: The Learning
Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79
8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.

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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again

[Jaime R. Garza]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 07:13,  wrote:

> Hi again,
>
> Thanks to everyone who has expressed a balanced, objective opinion about
> this.
>
> I don't want to spend a lot time here arguing about ads. I understand that
> it's a sensitive subject, I'm sorry that some people disagree, and I
> respect their opinions. But I would like to mention that I don't really
> have any control over the ad content, that is determined by Google. That
> being said, It seems rather strange to refer to Microsoft Office as
> "competition" and to show such a level of contempt toward it. I personally
> do not own, use, or even like Microsoft Office. But it isn't a taboo,
> shady, spammy, startup job. Like it or not, it's the industry standard
> still, and will continue to be so for a long time. Irrational hatred and
> attempts to obliterate all references to Microsoft or any other commercial
> project are counterproductive and don't seem to agree with the free spirit
> around LibreOffice. I have made a conscientious, informed, intelligent
> decision to use LibreOffice instead of Microsoft Office, and no amount of
> forum ads will sway me. I would hope and expect that most other users of
> the forum will likewise have the presence of mind to make a rational
> decision based on their own needs.
>
> That's all for now. Thanks for reading!
> Sam from LibreOfficeForum.org


Well, there is a Competitive Ad
Filterfor
Google Ads, so that's not an excuse. It sould be just silly if there
was
no possibility to filter competitors. And just to clarify, MS Office is
still the defacto standard, and The Document Foundation Community and
LibreOffice community want to change that. Do you really think you help the
cause by advertising MS Office? Your moral arguments are just not realistic,
we all live in the real world, and competition exists!!

Cheers!

Jaime

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

[tdf-discuss] Desktop Summit

[Doug Bash]

The TDF people are understandably busy with organisational tasks, nonetheless, 
it is a bit surprising that there seem to be no plans for a LO presence in 
Berlin this August at the GNOME-KDE fest. Could we not, at least, have 
recommendations for a couple of hotels we might congregate at and a bar  where 
we could push a few tables together and hang a nice green LibreOffice banner?

Doug Bash

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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Desktop Summit

[Florian Effenberger]

Hi Doug,

Doug Bash wrote on 2011-04-27 13.17:

The TDF people are understandably busy with organisational tasks, nonetheless, 
it is a bit surprising that there seem to be no plans for a LO presence in 
Berlin this August at the GNOME-KDE fest. Could we not, at least, have 
recommendations for a couple of hotels we might congregate at and a bar  where 
we could push a few tables together and hang a nice green LibreOffice banner?


thanks for the reminder. I forwarded it to our German mailing lists, we 
have a few people in Berlin. :)


Florian

--
Florian Effenberger 
Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation
Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108
Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff

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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Question about proposing the creation of a new format

[James Wilde]

I use LibO for writing, and produce ebooks from the output.

There are many ebook formats, as has already been pointed out by others, the 
main two being mobi (Kindle) and epub (almost every other e-reader).  I am 
active in a forum on ebooks, called mobileread.com.  I think I can say that the 
majority of writers there use one of two methods for creating ebooks.  Either 
they use a service called Smashwords, which takes MS Word documents and 
produces about six different kinds of ebooks, including pdf, txt, rtf, which 
most people don't count as ebook formats.  Or they use a program called 
Calibre, which has its support forum on mobileread.com, and which takes odt 
files as its preferred input.  These two methods I would call the professional 
approach.

On the other hand, someone interested in converting some of their documents to 
ebook (read epub) format for storage and use on their e-reader can make use of 
an extension which has been available for some time for OOo.  I can't remember 
how good this is, since it's a long time since I used it, but I think it 
produces acceptable quality for what we can call the non-professional approach.

My take on this suggestion is that LibO does what it does well.  Production of 
epub documents is a marginal requirement, which does not need to be addressed 
with a built-in function.  Professionals won't use it, and non-professionals 
are adequately served by the extension I mentioned - I believe there are now 
several btw.

So the bottom line is that I vote against incorporating epub production into 
LibO Writer.

Just my 2c

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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again

[Simos Xenitellis]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 8:13 AM,   wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> Thanks to everyone who has expressed a balanced, objective opinion about
> this.
>
> I don't want to spend a lot time here arguing about ads. I understand that
> it's a sensitive subject, I'm sorry that some people disagree, and I
> respect their opinions. But I would like to mention that I don't really
> have any control over the ad content, that is determined by Google. That
> being said, It seems rather strange to refer to Microsoft Office as
> "competition" and to show such a level of contempt toward it. I personally
> do not own, use, or even like Microsoft Office. But it isn't a taboo,
> shady, spammy, startup job. Like it or not, it's the industry standard
> still, and will continue to be so for a long time. Irrational hatred and
> attempts to obliterate all references to Microsoft or any other commercial
> project are counterproductive and don't seem to agree with the free spirit
> around LibreOffice. I have made a conscientious, informed, intelligent
> decision to use LibreOffice instead of Microsoft Office, and no amount of
> forum ads will sway me. I would hope and expect that most other users of
> the forum will likewise have the presence of mind to make a rational
> decision based on their own needs.
>

How about the issue that I mentioned earlier?

At http://www.sitedossier.com/ip/174.121.218.38 it shows that there
are 858 websites
hosted at the same dedicated server as LibreOfficeForum.org.

Examples include:
http://www.1dayacuvuemoistreviews.com/ Ad website for Acuvue
products (contact lenses)
http://1dayacuvuereviews.com(ditto)
http://www.acuvueadvanceforastigmatismreviews.com/
http://www.acuvueadvancereviews.com/
http://www.acuvuebifocalreviews.com/
http://www.acuvuecontactlensreviews.com/
http://www.acuvueoasysforastigmatismreviews.com/
http://www.acuvueoasysforpresbyopiareviews.com/
http://www.1luv2ya.com/(I have no idea what this is about)
http://proxyblind.org/   (Free Anonymous Proxy)
http://www.chinatradestudy.com/   (Unnamed website carrying Reuters stories)
http://carsbuysell.ca/  (Classified ads, almost
empty website)
http://www.awm-search-engine-optimization.co.uk/   (redirects to SEO website)

And LibreOfficeForum.org is at No 238 in the list.

Apart from the ads that you have on LibreOfficeForum.org you also benefit
from the increase in the ranking by Google for all the websites, due
to hosting LibreOfficeForum.org.

What's the business plan in running the dedicated server at
174.121.218.38 and how does LibreOfficeForum.org
fit to all these?

It makes it quite uncomfortable to host a free and open-source project
on an ad-supported platform.
With what I currently know, I would opt for no association to
LibreOfficeForum.org.

Simos

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

[tdf-discuss] Next IRC QA session

[Sophie Gautier]

Hi all,

I'm adding the dev list in cc but only for information, please follow 
the discussion on the tdf-discuss@list.


I would like to organize a new IRC QA session during the RC period. The 
last one, hum, was a bit empty, but we won't resign ;)
So I think we (I) should dedicate a bit more organization and dedication 
to it.
What I would like to organize first is the presence of the mentors 
during the whole period, we should have somebody available and really on 
line during a dedicated period of time, even making some noise on the 
channel (dancing with the bot is an option, yes :) to make sure 
newcomers won't go away by lack of activity.


So some questions:
- what would be the best period (imho the Friday and Saturday is still a 
good idea)?
- who would be available and when (on the 2 days, we will see the exact 
date later) ?
- who would like to prepare a presentation of the different QA tasks 
(mostly BZ, but speaking a bit of the tests would be good too). We will 
fix a date and time to play it twice, once for each main time zone.


Don't hesitate to make any comment or suggestion, even if it's new for 
you, this will help us to polish the organization.

Thanks in advance
Kind regards
Sophie
--
Founding member of The Document Foundation

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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Question about proposing the creation of a new format

[Ian Lynch]

> My take on this suggestion is that LibO does what it does well.  Production
> of epub documents is a marginal requirement


I'm sure that is what MSFT thought about Windows in relation to cell phones
and tablets ;-)

, which does not need to be addressed with a built-in function.
>  Professionals won't use it, and non-professionals are adequately served by
> the extension I mentioned - I believe there are now several btw.
>

So the bottom line is that I vote against incorporating epub production into
LibO Writer.Just my 2c

I don't think that was a specific proposal at this point, just that the
entire LO proposition could become marginalised by mobile technologies and
e-publishing in a relatively short space of time.


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



-- 
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications
The Schools ITQ

www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

You have received this email from the following company: The Learning
Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79
8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.

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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again

[James Wilde]

On Apr 26, 2011, at 18:57 , David Nelson wrote:

> Hi Sam,
> 
> I regretfully have to inform you that I had to remove the link to the
> LibreOfficeForum.org site at the request of Drew Jensen seconded by
> Charles Schulz. Sorry about that. Personally, I have no issues with
> your site.
> 
> I think Drew is willing to debate the matter. Maybe a solution could
> be found? Would removing the advertising be a possibility?
> 
> Anyway, just to keep you informed...
> 
I don't know whether I've missed something coming to this thread late, but is 
there an explanation of why they requested that the link be removed?

//James


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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again

[drew]

On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 17:55 +0200, James Wilde wrote:
> On Apr 26, 2011, at 18:57 , David Nelson wrote:
> 
> > Hi Sam,
> > 
> > I regretfully have to inform you that I had to remove the link to the
> > LibreOfficeForum.org site at the request of Drew Jensen seconded by
> > Charles Schulz. Sorry about that. Personally, I have no issues with
> > your site.
> > 
> > I think Drew is willing to debate the matter. Maybe a solution could
> > be found? Would removing the advertising be a possibility?
> > 
> > Anyway, just to keep you informed...
> > 
> I don't know whether I've missed something coming to this thread late, but is 
> there an explanation of why they requested that the link be removed?

Hi James,

That would best come from me perhaps.

The reason is actually rather simple - during this discussion it was
apparent that a number of people where strongly opposed to linking
directly to that forum. I do not think anyone would say that any type of
agreement let alone consensus had been reached.

while this was going one of the people with edit rights to the main web
pages added links to the site, without I believe realizing that this was
being discussed still.

My asking that person to remove the link should be construed as meaning
that the action was not appropriate at this time.

Beyond that I would like to make a few comments more directly to a few
points raised, but they would be best added to the emails in which they
were raised and I will do so as time permits during the day.

I hope that answers your question on the specific point.


Best wishes,

Drew Jensen




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

[tdf-discuss] numbering in contents but not document

[todd rme]

Hi, is there a way to have a heading that is numbered in the table of
contents but is not numbered in the document?  So, for instance, the
Table of Contents shows "1. Introduction", but the body of the
document shows just "Introduction"?

-Todd

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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Question about proposing the creation of a new format

[Mark Preston]

Dear good gods alive no! :eave the HTML to proper HTML IDE tools like
Eclipse and don't try to be everything in one package.

On 26/04/2011 22:48, e-letter wrote:
>> I think this is a very interesting issue. We are moving from the dominant
>> technologies that were designed to put information on paper to the dominant
>> need of presenting information on screens. With the revolution in digital
>> readers this is only going to increase and then what relevance has document
>> formats that are primarily designed to target hard copy output? If odf does
>> not adapt it will become obsolete.
>>
> 
> Seems to suggest that LO should become some sort of html (or any other
> electronic format) editor?
> 
>> I am constantly irritated by having to download pdfs, .docs and so on when
>> all I want to do is view the information without cluttering up my download
> 
> May I suggest to use the 'load url' bar to read documents directly on
> the web? As for pdf documents, evince can open directly from the url
> when activated via the command terminal
> 

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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again

[Ben McGinnes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 28/04/11 12:40 AM, Simos Xenitellis wrote:
>
> How about the issue that I mentioned earlier?
>
> At http://www.sitedossier.com/ip/174.121.218.38 it shows that there
> are 858 websites hosted at the same dedicated server as
> LibreOfficeForum.org.

*Sigh*

bash-3.2$ dig -x 174.121.218.38

; <<>> DiG 9.4.3-P3 <<>> -x 174.121.218.38
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 51994
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;38.218.121.174.in-addr.arpa.   IN  PTR

;; ANSWER SECTION:
38.218.121.174.in-addr.arpa. 43154 IN   PTR 26.da.79ae.static.theplanet.com.

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
218.121.174.in-addr.arpa. 43154 IN  NS  ns2.theplanet.com.
218.121.174.in-addr.arpa. 43154 IN  NS  ns1.theplanet.com.

;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
ns1.theplanet.com.  3069IN  A   207.218.247.135
ns2.theplanet.com.  39823   IN  A   207.218.223.162

;; Query time: 32 msec
;; SERVER: 192.231.203.132#53(192.231.203.132)
;; WHEN: Thu Apr 28 09:35:03 2011
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 158

bash-3.2$

Oh, gosh, what a surprise a free forum hosted on a shared hosting
platform using virtual hosting/domains.

If you want that site to have a dedicated IP, perhaps you should speak
to the domain owner about funding a move to a VPS or colocated box.


Regards,
Ben


-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEAREKAAYFAk24qXoACgkQNxrFv6BK4xPjVgCePAdTJaZF6rJBsyfUO1HA4MG8
B7MAnRhOSI/0BBcB1V2kYyPreWU8dt/6
=k9Z5
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again

[Jon Hamkins]

On 04/26/2011 09:57 AM, David Nelson wrote:

Hi Sam,

I regretfully have to inform you that I had to remove the link to the
LibreOfficeForum.org site at the request of Drew Jensen seconded by
Charles Schulz.


+1

I appreciate the effort Sam has made to create libreofficeforum.org. 
Like Sam, I feel that the general user community prefers forums to 
mailing lists, and that a well-implemented forum can really help grow 
the libreoffice community and provide a sense that the project is 
well-supported.  I also firmly believe that having an easy and 
recognizable URL is important -- oooforum won't work in the long-term.


Unfortunately, Sam made several poor choices in setting up 
libreofficeforum.org.


First, he apparently didn't discuss with the community at large (on the 
mailing lists) or the steering committee about what would make a good 
forum -- he just announced to the mailing list, in the first week of 
Oct. 2010, that he had created libreofficeforum.org.  It was set up the 
way he set it up, and that was that.  Several "what the...?" comments 
were made at the time, especially since the site had several flaws.


People have complained about the ads from day 1.  People have complained 
about MSO being advertised.  People have also said that they will not 
provide support on this site because of this.  As for me, well, I agree 
with these complaints 100%.  This is like selling candy to raise money 
for a tooth-decay foundation.  It makes no sense, and it creates a 
mixed-up message where the message should be very clear.


Sam said he needs to have ads, and he doesn't want to discuss the issue 
of ads here.  I'm sorry, but that is the major problem with the site. 
That issue needs to be hashed out, if not here, by the Steering 
Committee.  If the site needs to have ads, then we don't need the site, 
IMHO.  I'd much rather live with http://www.oooforum.org and

http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum in the short-term.

In any case, I think we oughtn't link to libreofficeforum.org from the 
official LibO site until we either reach consensus here on the mailing 
list, or the Steering Committee has come to a decision.


 Jon

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

Re: [tdf-discuss] numbering in contents but not document

[Irmhild Rogalla]

Todd,

Am 27.04.2011 19:33, schrieb todd rme:
> Hi, is there a way to have a heading that is numbered in the table of
> contents but is not numbered in the document?  So, for instance, the
> Table of Contents shows "1. Introduction", but the body of the
> document shows just "Introduction"?

it's better to ask such questions at the users-list (see 
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/); there you'll get 
help. This discuss list is more for general discussions about LibO.


regards
Irmhild

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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again

[sb73542]

>>How about the issue that I mentioned earlier?
>>
>>At http://www.sitedossier.com/ip/174.121.218.38 it
>>shows that there are 858 websites hosted at the
>>same dedicated server as LibreOfficeForum.org.

Hi again,

Yes, I am using a shared hosting platform. I never claimed otherwise. I
have used DownTownHost shared hosting for several years now, and I have
been extremely satisfied with the speed and reliability. It's definitely
good enough for a newly starting low-traffic forum, and if traffic were to
ever go through the roof I could always upgrade to a dedicated server. I
have no idea how they have their server farm set up or how many sites are
running behind that public IP, etc. But I assume that you realize that the
other sites you linked to are NOT mine? I administer precisely one other
site on this server related to a hobby, no more, no less. Sorry if I sound
terse or offended. I'm not. But I do want to set the facts straight.

Thanks,
Sam from LibreOfficeForum


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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again

[James Wilde]

Thanks Drew, that's good enough for me.

On Apr 27, 2011, at 18:12 , drew wrote:

> On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 17:55 +0200, James Wilde wrote:
>> On Apr 26, 2011, at 18:57 , David Nelson wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Sam,
>>> 
>>> I regretfully have to inform you that I had to remove the link to the
>>> LibreOfficeForum.org site at the request of Drew Jensen seconded by
>>> Charles Schulz. Sorry about that. Personally, I have no issues with
>>> your site.
>>> 
>>> I think Drew is willing to debate the matter. Maybe a solution could
>>> be found? Would removing the advertising be a possibility?
>>> 
>>> Anyway, just to keep you informed...
>>> 
>> I don't know whether I've missed something coming to this thread late, but 
>> is there an explanation of why they requested that the link be removed?
> 
> Hi James,
> 
> That would best come from me perhaps.
> 
> The reason is actually rather simple - during this discussion it was
> apparent that a number of people where strongly opposed to linking
> directly to that forum. I do not think anyone would say that any type of
> agreement let alone consensus had been reached.
> 
> while this was going one of the people with edit rights to the main web
> pages added links to the site, without I believe realizing that this was
> being discussed still.
> 
> My asking that person to remove the link should be construed as meaning
> that the action was not appropriate at this time.
> 
> Beyond that I would like to make a few comments more directly to a few
> points raised, but they would be best added to the emails in which they
> were raised and I will do so as time permits during the day.
> 
> I hope that answers your question on the specific point.
> 
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Drew Jensen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


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