crash - crash - crash - crash. !@#$#@!

users
#41

Hi Tom :slight_smile:
Good answers to Urmas there. Considerate, understanding and
light-hearted. Nicely done! :slight_smile:

I've almost never found 'professional' proprietary stuff to be any better
than OpenSource. Indeed a new study by an independant security company
found that OpenSource had slightly less errors per 1,000 lines of code.
There is also the usual faster response time to fixing issues due to even
mere normal users being able to report issues quickly and fairly easily and
perhaps even getting involved in solving the problem and discovering coding
skills.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#42

It should be obvious that I don't need permission.

If you give bullies cover, they will flourish. It's that simple.

No cover. None.

t.

#43

Hi Urmas

GSM

"Sigrid Carrera":

those posts through, that do not insult anyone on the list.

Please quote me where I did insult anyone here. This is slander.

If you don't see where, even quoting your mails won't make you aware of
your insults. We have been several to warn you either here and on Bugzilla
about your bad behaviour since some times now.

I don't think that there is much use in banning him from the mailing

lists itself

You seem to forget yourself. I am contributing to this project and would

like to be treated accordingly by outsiders.

You will be well treated only and only if you treat others the same way. We
don't care about your contributions if they are not done by respecting the
other members of the community.

I hope that you will really read and understand what I mean because
otherwise you would have lost the pleasure and the opportunity to be a
contributor of our great community.

Kind regards
Sophie

#44

+1 Virgil
There is no worse contempt that not to do appreciation.
Miguel Ángel

#45

Did I miss something? Who/what is Urmas?

#46

@NoOp

Full threads in context are available on the Nabble service:

http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Users-f1639498.html

#47

@NoOp

Full threads in context are available on the Nabble service:

http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Users-f1639498.html

Thanks, I can read full threads. I had filtered Urmas some time back.
However, my question was more directed towards Tom Davies who jumped
into the same subthread following Tom Cloyd's response to me.

#48

Hi :slight_smile:
Nope. You missed nothing by filtering Urmas, don't worry.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#49

Greetings.

I disagree, Tom, in the strongest possible terms.

I've been extremely busy this week, doing what I do - taking care of victims of interpersonal abuse of all sorts.

This Urmas matter is far from resolved, as far as I'm concerned.

Every work group, and that's what this is - we're here to get work done, has at least two legitimate and necessary functions, from the point of view of groups process:

1. The work which brings the group together. Most people, especially males, focus on this. It's only natural.

2. Group process and maintenance concerns. This is usually taken up, if at all, only when some crisis arises (a bad practice), and is much more often a focus for females than for males. One sees this gender differential in families as well.

The big point to be made is that success with #1 depends on success with #2, though this is often not well recognized.

As I am escaping a bit from my own work week, I'll return to this issue here. I definitely am not finished, and I will be attempting to refocus people on the real issue which I raised in my initial post about Urmas. I'll give a synopsis for those who are arriving to this late. I'll also start a new thread, as this present thread was really about an LO instability problem I was having which is now resolved by the current Master.

The issue for me, and I think for all of us, is about this list's being a safe place to resolve LO problems. That statement requires clarification, and I'll provide that.

Tom

#50

[snip]

Tom,

It's been addressed. It's been discussed to death. Time to shake
the sand out of your panties and move on. You're becoming tedious.

Regards,
Jim

#51

Jim,

Discussing isn't resolving. You, and a number of others, clearly do not grasp the issue at all. Or maybe you're just indifferent to abuse. Well, I'm not.

When I'm finished with this, I'll be quiet, and not before. As I said, I've been occupied with higher priorities all week. That should not cause the matter to become irrelevant.

And I find the gender-related slam very revealing. Real men don't attempt to shut up other men either by using abusive language or by suggesting they're somehow acting like the other gender. Looks like another bullying-attempt to me - because it is.

I'm quite sure the few women involved in this list recognized the slam, and didn't like it one bit.

I've heard from exactly three women about this, one, backchannel. All three spoke in strongly and clearly in their rejection of the bullying behavior which started this thread. That rather tells us who's leading here and who's just irrelevant.

If you're disinterested, go elsewhere.

Tom

#52

Jim,

MORE threatening language? Witness a large mind at work.

So, Jim, you find being bored more objectionable than backchannel bullying. Got it.

This actually isn't about you. It isn't even about me.

Does this list have a problem?

I haven't the time right now to finish writing what I have to say. I will, in a few hours. If the list finds it irrelevant, so be it. But to attempt to shut me up before you've even hear what I have to say? That alone makes you irrelevant.

This problem requires thought, not threats. If this is a problem for you, sit down.

Tom