Christian Einfeldt wrote: > Getting angry at people is not going to help you win your > campaign with me personally, and I am already biased in your favor > to begin with.
I wasn't angry. My writing tends to be emotive, but that's how I write. That's how I alk. But I wasn't upset at all when I wrote. Not one bit. > your hot temper; See above. I did not have a temper when I wrote. Your post didn't make me angry. I simply explained the problem using what I thought were clear analogies. > > you have little imagination. I can see how that comment would bother you. I apologise. I'm sorry. I did not mean to attack you. It's unfortunate that email does not permit non-verbal clues like tone of voice and body language. If you had been able to look at me when I was writing you would have seen I was perfectly calm, and I was trying to explain the issue. > Your vision and passion are important to the group, but I don't always > find myself being persuaded the way I was with the bug that you offered > for a vote. It's inevitable that you will not always be persuaded by what I say. That's normal, and it's ok. > Jean Hollis Weber is very skilled at making change. I think that > you and I and lots of others agree that we can learn from watching > her. She will be a great resource for you. Learn from her. You know well that I am always keen on hearing advice. Another thing that would be good to keep in mind is that I don't just write ideas without thought. The points I raise about the course of OOo are things I've discussed with sevral people. Perhaps on list, perhaps on IRC, or on rare occassions by private mail. I sent that post in the knowledge that several people feel that way and agree. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org |
