Hi :) Ahh, i understand now. You don't mean to be insulting and don't even notice when you do it.
Your statement, "As for customer service, we don't do customer service.", well said. I'm not sure who the "we" is. It doesn't include almost anyone on this mailing list since the whole reason for this mailing list is to provide "customer service". It is what most of us are here for. Your "please describe, step by step". Actually we deal with people here. It's not like programming. There are rarely logical steps. A first response might be to point them to documentation that covers exactly what was asked. Ideally would summarise and simplify but would also ask for more detail and/or background information. So there are 3 things that would seem to be vital but actually most of the time it's none of those that really helped. The main thing that helped was an acknowledgement that the question was heard by a human being. After that the question starts to emerge. It's best when several people each jump in with different types of answers or dealing with different aspect of what the question might be. The o.p. tends to start responding to 1 of those people and that tends to indicate the direction that the real question is about. For example a good answer to the question "My curtains are a bit charred. How do i stop them getting like that?" might be "Grab your bag and leave the building. Your house is on fire". Sometimes it takes a bit of a leap like that. It's seldom something that can fit neatly into step-by-step instructions. Your ""I was on the users list and not anywhere else" is not a valid argument" IS very belittling. When something is finally fixed and has been working well do you assume that the people who worked so hard on it would then go and break it? I think most of us were guilty of assuming that once a thing was fixed and could be happily maintained with little or no effort that attention would move onto things that were still broken to fix them too. I can't believe so much work has gone into breaking something that was fine. If the web-designers really wanted to fix something how about helping all the international translators sort theirs out? How about moving into UI or UX design and lending a hand there. It's not like there is a shortage of interesting things to do! Regards from Tom :) On 7 August 2014 14:25, Charles-H. Schulz < charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org> wrote: > Quoting myself: > > "please describe, step by step, what is hard > about contributing or finding information about contributing." > > No answer to that question. > > As for customer service, we don't do customer service. Volunteers provide > users support. Users support in this case is not done as a consequence of a > purchase or any sort of commercial transaction. It changes quite a lot of > things. But as I wrote before: "I would never say that"...talking about > belittling the value or complexity of users support. > > Charles. > > > Le 07.08.2014 15:17, Tom Davies a écrit : > >> Hi :) >> That just highlights my points. >> >> If you really want to learn about customer support then i suggest >> taking a course in it. People put years of study into it. I'm not >> sure i could explain it all in a quick email. Perhaps you could >> explain C++ in a quick email? >> >> There is a bit more to it than you might expect. Try helping solve >> users problems on this mailing list for a while and i think you would >> be surprised. >> >> Regards from >> Tom :) >> >> On 7 August 2014 13:54, Charles-H. Schulz >> <charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org> wrote: >> >> Le 07.08.2014 14:28, Tom Davies a écrit : >>> >>> Hi :) >>>> No-Op has been a huge help to many people on this User Mailing >>>> List >>>> since the very early days of TDF. I know that user-support and >>>> customer service are kinda frowned on as being not much work. >>>> >>> >>> I would never say that. >>> >>> However it is the first point-of-contact between weeus and is a >>>> prime >>>> place to build people up and recruit them for this and other >>>> teams. I >>>> bet there are tons of people in various teams right now who >>>> wouldn't >>>> be there if it hadn't been for No-Op inspiring and pushing them >>>> into >>>> it. >>>> >>> >>> I am a bit surprised by that but I could be wrong: Noop has had >>> quite a few negative comments for years and it did not strike me >>> that it could attract new volunteers or that he was helping people >>> to become volunteers. >>> >>> Instead of grumbling about how little work No-Op is doing how >>>> about >>>> doing more work yourself to answer the unanswered questions here. >>>> Maybe that way you could show us how little work it takes and we >>>> would >>>> learn to be better. Or maybe, just maybe you'd find out how much >>>> hard >>>> work it takes. >>>> >>> >>> Let's do this then: what is hard to understand - I'm not saying >>> everything's easy, but please describe, step by step, what is hard >>> about contributing or finding information about contributing. >>> >>> The old web-page No-Op linked to was finally neat and tidy. >>>> Almost >>>> elegant! It was finally easy to see how to change anything such >>>> as >>>> language, OS, version. It was even quite a good way of showing >>>> off >>>> quite what variety LO offers but done in way that wasn't >>>> confusing or >>>> hidden. At last the buttons were proper buttons that could be >>>> pressed >>>> like real-world buttons. >>>> >>>> In chess games there is sometimes a dangerous moment when your >>>> position is so perfect that any move is going to detract from >>>> that >>>> perfection. There are times when you really need to pass and >>>> miss a >>>> go or lose the game. That appears to have happened to the >>>> downloads >>>> page. >>>> >>> >>> So this download page has been around for 6 months. There was a >>> period of public development and public feedback collection of 3 >>> months before that. Where were you? Where was Noop? (BTW: "I was on >>> the users list and not anywhere else" is not a valid argument). >>> >>> I was shocked by the downloads page today. The layout IS >>>> appalling >>>> and confusing. It's difficult to find how to get anything other >>>> than >>>> the default download. Then set choices kept getting forgotten. >>>> Tick-boxes used inappropriately and didn't work. >>>> >>>> Change just for the sake of change is not always positive. >>>> >>> >>> True. Criticizing something for 4 years does not make it right >>> either... >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Charles. >>> >>> Regards from >>> Tom :) >>> >>> On 7 August 2014 09:09, Charles-H. Schulz >>> <charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org> wrote: >>> >>> Le 07.08.2014 09:55, NoOp a écrit : >>> >>> On 08/06/2014 10:01 AM, Florian Reisinger wrote: >>> Hi Tom, >>> >>> If we do not find the bugs in the fresh version, they won't be >>> resolved until the rename to Stable/Still. If less use Fresh, the >>> quality of the next stable will be lower.... Does this help? >>> >>> No. Basically what you and Sophie are saying is that 'we fully >>> expect >>> new/any user to download and use the "Fresh" branch by default so >>> that >>> LO (dev?) can find an resolve bugs in the 'new & improved & added >>> feature' version'. That's just crazy talk. >>> >>> No, that is how Free Software works. If you think it is crazy, >>> then >>> Ubuntu, Firefox, the Linux kernel, Debian, Fedora, Mint, VLC... >>> every >>> other project has that crazy way. >>> >>> I am somewhat astounded as I hear Charles complaining about funding >>> (rightly so, that's his job), >>> >>> huh? What is my job, according to you? >>> >>> users complaining about lack of bug fixes >>> w/dev's LO countering with 'we only have a certain amount of >>> resources & >>> have to prioritise' etc., etc. So why even have two branches to >>> begin with? >>> >>> Because branches do not cost more money than 10 or 1. >>> >>> The Fresh/Still nonsense is just that - nonsense. Here is a link to >>> the >>> internet archive from LO Download in 2013 Dec 31: >>> >>> >>> <https://web.archive.org/web/20131231021742/http://www. >> libreoffice.org/download >> >>> [1] >>> [1]> >>> >>> On that page there is no "Fresh", "Stable", "Still" et al; there is >>> only >>> download defaulting to 4.1.4. and minor link options to change to >>> 4.0 or >>> 'Pre-releases' 4.2. That download page makes complete sense. Why on >>> earth the "private marketing list" change to the current nonsense? >>> >>> @TDF: Please just stop. Go back to the download page of December >>> 2013 & >>> keep it simple. >>> >>> @Noop: please stop complaining about changes. In 2010, you were >>> already complaining about the same things. >>> >>> IMO you should just drop the "Still" branch and concentrate your >>> dev >>> efforts on one *single* user release. The next time that I (as a >>> user) >>> hear that you've not enough resources to address a bug report I'll >>> have >>> to ask: so, how many devs are working on 'Fresh' v 'Still' v >>> 'Daily' v >>> 'Trunk' v EOL, etc? Can you not fix the bug because these folks are >>> spread so thin across the various "branches" that they can't >>> properly >>> concentrate on a baseline release fix? >>> >>> @Sophie/Florian: The admission that 'Fresh' is the default so that >>> bugs >>> will be identified earlier is, IMO, nuts (other words come to mind, >>> but >>> I'll try to keep this civilized). 'Hello World - take our RC >>> (X.Y.0) and >>> use it by default so that we can debug it' is not a good thing to >>> announce/promote here or elsewhere. >>> >>> @Charles: you keep asking for users on in this thread to suggest a >>> new >>> name ("Now: if you have ideas for new names, etc. you are welcome >>> to >>> contribute to our marketing team.) - no name is necessary, nor >>> should it >>> be necessary for users on this list to need to subscribe to the >>> marketing list to voice their concerns. You are TDF - instead >>> invite the >>> "private marketing list" members to participate in this thread, >>> this is >>> afterall a user & user support concern. BTW: for those that may >>> want to >>> do this anyway, just how does one gain access to this "private >>> marketing >>> list" that Sophie spoke of? How about providing a link to a >>> transcript >>> of the "private marketing list" contents so that others on this >>> "open >>> source" project can review? >>> >>> Do you think TDF is a company? TDF relies on volunteers. Our users >>> are our future contributors. We are not Wal Mart. You don't buy >>> things >>> from us and users are not customers. So yes, even if it sounds >>> crazy >>> to you, we do highly encourage users to join our various teams. As >>> for >>> the private marketing list, yes we do use this list mostly for >>> press/announcement preparations, otherwise news and text elements >>> would be disclosed before due date. How do you join this list? Good >>> question. By contributing, not by complaining, and by asking. And >>> if >>> that's not your call, we have plenty of other teams for you to join >>> : >>> https://www.libreoffice.org/community/get-involved/ [2] [2] >>> >>> >>> If that's still not your call, and you just want to use >>> LibreOffice... that's fine! we are happy that you do so. >>> >>> Bottom line is that I (and others) disagree with the "private >>> marketing >>> list" decision to go with the existing 'Fresh/Still/whatever' >>> download >>> page(s). Please consider simply rolling back to the Dec 2013 model. >>> >>> Thank you for your suggestion, but no, we won't. We have deployed >>> a >>> brand new website, asked for feedback on several completely open >>> and >>> public lists for several months. We feel good about the choices we >>> have made (although we are still toying with the Still branch name) >>> but no we won't come back to the December 2013, December 2010 or >>> December 10 C.E. because some think the past is always better than >>> the >>> future. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Charles. >>> >>> -- >>> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org >>> Problems? >>> >>> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ >> >>> [3] >>> [3] >>> Posting guidelines + more: >>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette [4] [4] >>> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ >>> [5] [5] >>> >>> >>> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and >>> cannot >>> be deleted >>> >>> Links: >>> ------ >>> [1] >>> >>> https://web.archive.org/web/20131231021742/http://www. >> libreoffice.org/download >> >>> [1] >>> [2] https://www.libreoffice.org/community/get-involved/ [2] >>> [3] >>> >>> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ >> >>> [3] >>> [4] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette [4] >>> [5] http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ [5] >>> >> >> >> >> Links: >> ------ >> [1] >> https://web.archive.org/web/20131231021742/http://www. >> libreoffice.org/download >> [2] https://www.libreoffice.org/community/get-involved/ >> [3] http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ >> [4] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette >> [5] http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ >> > -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
