question about the best version of libreoffice:

users
#21

Virgil Arrington wrote

Returning to the subject I believe it would be useful to find out what
is making people stick to older (and in particular discontinued)
versions. If it is because the new features in new versions are not
useful to them but the version they use fulfills all their needs, then
it is fine. But if the cause are regressions then it is something to
worry about. Just my 2 cents.

...

All this to say that I'll continue to use LO 4 until it no longer
performs my work. Then I'll upgrade to the most stable of the "still"
versions available at that time. Who knows, by then it could be LO
6.x.5. But, my days of trying a newer version simply because it's
available are over.

And that is absolutely fine! In fact for those with similar inclinations,
here is a link to our archived releases:

/librreoffice/old
<http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/>

Of course even from these users we (the LibreOffice project) really need
folks to install the developmental and pre-releases, in parallel of course
[1], both to see emerging features (or regressions) but more importantly to
provide feed back to the design, development and QA process. That is an
aspect of care and feeding a FOSS project that users should not abdicate.
LibreOffice is a great project, please participate.

Stuart

=-ref-=
1. https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Installing_in_parallel

#22

At the risk of sounding like a whiner, I recently tried to participate by reporting a bug in LO's outline numbering system (bug 96733). The triage volunteer didn't think much of my bug report and first offered a solution. When I suggested that the proffered solution didn't work, he responded that I shouldn't confuse my desires with what is correct (both of which are accomplished with LaTeX). As a result, for certain outlining work, I'm forced to use LaTeX when I would prefer to use LO, which unfortunately doesn't work either correctly or as desired. When attempts to participate are rebuffed, it doesn't encourage further participation.

Again, I apologize for my whining. I realize not everyone shares my priorities.

Virgil

#23

Nasrin (and others),

hi every one.
i thank you for your time and answering my question.
i was waiting to see all comments and after that reply them.
i recieved my answer from tom and also i i appreciate him specially.

Hi :slight_smile:
Many people on this mailing list have had signatures that include
Bible quotes or such-like without anyone grumbling or anything. I
thought it was nice to see something similar from a different religion
for a change.

Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

And I tend to ignore all of them instinctively. I would not have
answered this topic if I had noticed that sermon.
Interesting how the least relevant null topics trigger the most
extensive discussions on this list. Trolls at work.

--
O people! there has come to you indeed an admonition from your Lord
and a healing for what is in the breasts and a guidance and a mercy
for the believers.
Say: In the grace of Allah and in His mercy-- in that they should
rejoice; it is better than that which they gather.
holy quran, chapter 10.

please visit al-islam.org

Since it appears that it is OK to proselytise on this list I will tell you about MY God - who is better than your gods (since your gods don't really exist):

MY God is Jibbers Crabst and was revealed to the world in a great sermon by the Muchly High Priest and First Prophet, Matt Inman:

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ_BtZ-5O60

Jibbers is a fire-breathing lobster who lives behind the rings of Saturn. Jibbers is THE ONE TRUE GOD and replaces all previous false gods. Everyone who is believer in other false gods should immediately repent of their mistaken beliefs and adore and commit their lives to Jibbers - our Lord and Saviour.

The Yankee People are the chosen people of Jibbers (see the sermon for details - I am Australian BTW but that does not affect my belief in Jibbers as the ONE TRUE GOD) and will dwell forever in The House of Jibbers.

If you do not see the light and immediately switch your belief from your false gods to Jibbers, the soldiers and children of Jibbers, giant Bombardier Beetles, will rise up and send flaming balls down all of your unbelieving throats for the rest of eternity! After that eternity, giant Brazilian Wandering Spiders will inject you all with venom that will cause more pain than is imaginable for another eternity!

So Nasrin, and others, repent of your erroneous faiths and before it is too late, pledge your lives to the ONE TRUE GOD - Jibbers Crabst! and be saved from eternal pain and damnation! and live with Jibbers forever around the most beautiful planet in the Solar system!

Have a nice day.

Phil.

#24

Please note that the original message by Nasrin was on a topic germane to
this list. One member with an excessively tender sore spot objected to
something in Nasrin's signature that expressed his sincerely held faith.
There was no intent on Nasrin's part to proselytize or to demean another's
faith, as Phil's diatribe does.

In my opinion, Nasrin has a perfect right to express his personal beliefs
anywhere he chooses, including on this list, if it is not the subject of
the post.

#25

I tend to agree about signature lines. They can contain all kinds of things having nothing to do with LO. Sometimes they're funny; other times they are informative about the writer. Phil's signature line includes his address in Australia, which is informative, but has nothing to do with LO. Nasrin's signature line includes a a few lines about his Muslim faith, also informative but also having nothing to do with LO.

I pretty much ignore signature lines, and I can't possibly imagine being offended by one, regardless of what it might say.

Virgil

#26

jomali,

Please note that the original message by Nasrin was on a topic germane
to this list. One member with an excessively tender sore spot objected
to something in Nasrin's signature that expressed his sincerely held
faith. There was no intent on Nasrin's part to proselytize

How naive are you? Of course it is proselytising! - why else would that sort of nonsense be in a signature? All superstitious and political organisations depend on increasing their numbers, otherwise they die as organisations - it is just marketing - and it is objectionable.

or to
demean another's faith, as Phil's diatribe does.

My "diatribe" is just as valid and provable as Nasrim's diatribe or nonsense . .

In my opinion, Nasrin has a perfect right to express his personal
beliefs anywhere he chooses, including on this list, if it is not the
subject of the post.

I think you will find Nasrim is a "she" - so much for your general knowledge - but I am not surprised . . it is as useful as your opinion . .

P.

#27

Virgil,

Please note that the original message by Nasrin was on a topic germane to
this list. One member with an excessively tender sore spot objected to
something in Nasrin's signature that expressed his sincerely held faith.
There was no intent on Nasrin's part to proselytize or to demean another's
faith, as Phil's diatribe does.

I tend to agree about signature lines. They can contain all kinds of
things having nothing to do with LO. Sometimes they're funny;

That would be fine . .

other
times they are informative about the writer. Phil's signature line
includes his address in Australia, which is informative, but has
nothing to do with LO. Nasrin's signature line includes a a few lines
about his Muslim faith,

Another person with low general knowledge . . again I am not surprised . .

also informative but also having nothing to do
with LO.

I pretty much ignore signature lines, and I can't possibly imagine
being offended by one, regardless of what it might say.

a Christian who loves Muslims

And there we have it - another person who has an agenda - they can't criticise someone else for proselytising their superstitious nonsense because they have their own superstitious nonsense . . a person who "loves" someone else but does not even know that the person they "love" is a "she" and not a "he" . . clueless . .

P.

#28

Hi :slight_smile:
Phil, i know you think you probably think you are just an atheist and
acting reasonably but this topic didn't arise in all the years that we
have seen Christian messages in various people's signatures. The
discussion only arose after the only Islamic quote in all these years.

This has happened at a time when it's popular to attack Muslims for
their faith, and for the stereotypes pushed out by mainstream media to
demonise and vilify Muslims.

Ridiculing religions in general might seem reasonable but choosing to
do so right now, only after the first Islamic quote in a signature and
not in any of the previous several years of Christian quotes (and
hundreds of them) is Islamaphobic.

It has been good to see people on this mailing-list increasingly make
a stand against the increasing level of Islamaphobia in this thread -
even people who don't understand or don't agree with Islam. In my
opinion standing with someone who seems to be being given a hard-time
by 'the mainstream' is FAR more impressive than just taking cheap
opportunistic pot-shots that are

LibreOffice and the OpenDocument Format are making a stand against the
mainstream and although the tide may be beginning to turn for us i am
sure we can all remember moments where mainstream-people have done or
said things, without even realising it, that are extremely pro-MSO and
their ever-changing, unreliable formats.

Please can we drop this topic and get on with the questions at hand?
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#29

Amen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amen

Met vriendelijke groeten, Salutations distinguées, Kind Regards,

DRIES FEYS
CORPORATE SERVICES • Specialist Software Developer

TVH GROUP NV
Brabantstraat 15 • BE-8790 WAREGEM
T +32 56 43 42 11 • F +32 56 43 44 88 • www.tvh.com
Watch our company movies on www.tvh.tv

Business Innovation
through
Information Technology
bi2t.tvh.com

#30

Chill, Phil.

I can't believe the level of antagonism coming through your keyboard. I'm "clueless" for not knowing Nasrin's gender? Harsh, man. While I have many contacts with Muslims from around the world, I had never heard the name Nasrin before and recalled nothing in her emails that betrayed her gender.

If choosing to love people, regardless of my knowledge of their gender, is an agenda, then I suppose I have an agenda. I'm genuinely surprised that my decision to love a Muslim I've never met upsets you so much that you feel it necessary to accuse me of having "low general knowledge" and being "clueless." Where does such a miserable world view come from?

I won't use the LO list to advance my views of Christianity. I use other lists for that, where it is admittedly more appropriate. But, I reserve the right to come to the defense of another who has been unfairly attacked for what she happened to put in her signature line. (I'll blindly accept your assertion that Nasrin is female.) I felt your attack unwarranted and unworthy of a gentlemen, regardless of your religious views.

Sorry, Tom, I had to respond to Phil, and I felt I had to do it on list.

I'll let it go, now.

Virgil

#31

Well said, Tom.

#32

Virgil,

Chill, Phil.

I can't believe the level of antagonism coming through your keyboard.
I'm "clueless" for not knowing Nasrin's gender? Harsh, man. While I
have many contacts with Muslims from around the world, I had never
heard the name Nasrin before and recalled nothing in her emails that
betrayed her gender.

If choosing to love people, regardless of my knowledge of their
gender, is an agenda, then I suppose I have an agenda. I'm genuinely
surprised that my decision to love a Muslim I've never met upsets you
so much that you feel it necessary to accuse me of having "low general
knowledge" and being "clueless." Where does such a miserable world
view come from?

Just observation - you believe in sky fairies and supporting others who are attacked for proselytising their sky fairies because an attack on one sky fairy is an attack on all sky fairies . .

I won't use the LO list to advance my views of Christianity.

Good - and others should not use it to advance their superstitions either.

I use
other lists for that, where it is admittedly more appropriate. But, I
reserve the right to come to the defense of another who has been
unfairly attacked for what she happened to put in her signature line.
(I'll blindly accept your assertion that Nasrin is female.) I felt
your attack unwarranted and unworthy of a gentlemen, regardless of
your religious views.

Well if you weren't clueless (which is not consistent with you believing in fairy stories) you would have realised by now that I don't have any and that I don't approve of others proselytising on this list . .

P.

#33

Tom,

Hi :slight_smile:
Phil, i know you think you probably think you are just an atheist and
acting reasonably but this topic didn't arise in all the years that we
have seen Christian messages in various people's signatures. The
discussion only arose after the only Islamic quote in all these years.

It certainly was not the first - but it should be the last.

This has happened at a time when it's popular to attack Muslims for
their faith, and for the stereotypes pushed out by mainstream media to
demonise and vilify Muslims.

Ridiculing religions in general might seem reasonable but choosing to
do so right now, only after the first Islamic quote in a signature and
not in any of the previous several years of Christian quotes (and
hundreds of them) is Islamaphobic.

No, superstitionphobic . .

It has been good to see people on this mailing-list increasingly make
a stand against the increasing level of Islamaphobia in this thread -
even people who don't understand or don't agree with Islam. In my
opinion standing with someone who seems to be being given a hard-time
by 'the mainstream' is FAR more impressive than just taking cheap
opportunistic pot-shots that are

People should not be proselytising on this list - period. To hijack my intention as "Islamaphobia" is childish . .

LibreOffice and the OpenDocument Format are making a stand against the
mainstream and although the tide may be beginning to turn for us i am
sure we can all remember moments where mainstream-people have done or
said things, without even realising it, that are extremely pro-MSO and
their ever-changing, unreliable formats.

OK, but I don't what that has to do with the legitimacy of people proselytising on a technical list.

Please can we drop this topic and get on with the questions at hand?

Sure - but I will still respond as I originally did if I come across more proselytising (by anyone) . . it is inappropriate and offensive and should not be condoned or encouraged.

P.

#34

Hi :slight_smile:
I feel really bad now, that you seem to be forced into defending
yourself. And Virgil needing to defend himself doubtless with others
on all sides feeling more and more pushed into defending their views
or beliefs.

A belief-system that defines all other's beliefs as being
"superstitions" sounds alarmingly intolerant to me. Anyone who thinks
that everyone who disagrees with their own belief is "clueless" seems
to me to be scarily arrogant, to me. But that is just my own personal
belief and i'd probably defend individuals who felt the need to
postulate alternatives, in a discussion (but preferably not on this
mailing list because, as we all seem to agree, this is probably not
the place for it).

As someone, who i believe was amazing, once said "An eye for an eye
and the whole world goes blind".

Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#35

Sure - but I will still respond as I originally did if I come across more proselytising (by anyone) . . it is inappropriate and offensive and should not be condoned or encouraged.

by one standard definition of 'proselytize'/'proselytise' your last several posts are guilty of it.

I thought 'signatures' were generally off-topic. though I'd keep my mouth shut, I admit though I'd be wrought up if someone advocated Microsoft Word! but a 'blessing' from 'sky fairies'? some must have a terrible time in flu season with all the 'God bless you!' in the air!

anyway, I agree: stop the proselytizing!

(well, except in 'signatures' where it doesn't count).

f.

#36

Virgil,

Chill, Phil.

I can't believe the level of antagonism coming through your keyboard.
I'm "clueless" for not knowing Nasrin's gender? Harsh, man. While I
have many contacts with Muslims from around the world, I had never
heard the name Nasrin before and recalled nothing in her emails that
betrayed her gender.

If choosing to love people, regardless of my knowledge of their
gender, is an agenda, then I suppose I have an agenda. I'm genuinely
surprised that my decision to love a Muslim I've never met upsets you
so much that you feel it necessary to accuse me of having "low general
knowledge" and being "clueless." Where does such a miserable world
view come from?

Just observation - you believe in sky fairies and supporting others who are attacked for proselytising their sky fairies because an attack on one sky fairy is an attack on all sky fairies . .

I won't use the LO list to advance my views of Christianity.

Good - and others should not use it to advance their superstitions either.

I use
other lists for that, where it is admittedly more appropriate. But, I
reserve the right to come to the defense of another who has been
unfairly attacked for what she happened to put in her signature line.
(I'll blindly accept your assertion that Nasrin is female.) I felt
your attack unwarranted and unworthy of a gentlemen, regardless of
your religious views.

Well if you weren't clueless (which is not consistent with you believing in fairy stories) you would have realised by now that I don't have any and that I don't approve of others proselytising on this list . .

P.

#37

I haven't seen anything in the mainstream media that demonises and
vilifys Muslims. Only in right wing rags. Cite(s) please.

#38

perhaps offlist?

interested individuals could ask to be copied.

f.

#39

Tom,

Hi :slight_smile:
I feel really bad now, that you seem to be forced into defending
yourself.

Don't worry too hard . . I don't need defending . .

And Virgil needing to defend himself doubtless with others
on all sides feeling more and more pushed into defending their views
or beliefs.

You continue to misunderstand (I am not surprised) . . I am NOT defending my "beliefs" I am saying clearly that a technical list is NOT a place for proselytising on superstitions or politics or anything else that does not have something to do with what the list if for.

A belief-system that defines all other's beliefs as being
"superstitions" sounds alarmingly intolerant to me.

Then you don't understand Science (why am I still not surprised?) - Science is based on creating hypotheses that are capable of being falsified - superstitions are beyond the purvue of Science. Things that are claimed but can't be proved false are superstitions - nothing to do with tolerance. However, it is true, I have no tolerance for people who claim they know the truth, with absolutely no evidence whatsoever and thousands of years of evidence to the contrary, and proselytise their nonsense on lists where this should not occur. AGAIN - it is unacceptable and offensive to rational people.

Anyone who thinks
that everyone who disagrees with their own belief is "clueless" seems
to me to be scarily arrogant, to me.

Don't put words into my mouth - I did not say that - I said you were clueless because of your statements - I stand by what I said and you have only added to this conviction since. See above re Science.

But that is just my own personal
belief and i'd probably defend individuals who felt the need to
postulate alternatives, in a discussion (but preferably not on this
mailing list because, as we all seem to agree, this is probably not
the place for it).

About time! Why didn't you say that in the first place?

As someone, who i believe was amazing, once said "An eye for an eye
and the whole world goes blind".

Yeh, yeh, a nice homily but no replacement for intelligent thought and rational deliberation.

P.

#40

Felmon,

Sure - but I will still respond as I originally did if I come across more proselytising (by anyone) . . it is inappropriate and offensive and should not be condoned or encouraged.

by one standard definition of 'proselytize'/'proselytise' your last

"ise" is English English not Yankee English . . clueless . .

several posts are guilty of it.

Then you don't understand what the word means.

I thought 'signatures' were generally off-topic. though I'd keep my
mouth shut, I admit though I'd be wrought up if someone advocated
Microsoft Word! but a 'blessing' from 'sky fairies'? some must have a
terrible time in flu season with all the 'God bless you!' in the air!
anyway, I agree: stop the proselytizing!

You need to learn how to use a dictionary.

(well, except in 'signatures' where it doesn't count).

This was the beginning of the original post:

"in the name of god the most compassionate the most merciful."

This was the end of the original post:

"i have a gift for you for all of you one of the english translations
of the holy quran.
the message of god for all mankind, in the all universe in all times,
the message for salvation of mankind in this world and the hereafter,
the message of monotheism, mercy, compassionate, fraternity, kindness,
justice, friendship, goodness and happiness for all mankind.
the holy quran encourages his followers to appreciate kindness of others.
reply them better or returnthere goodness and do good with the same.
And when you are greeted with a greeting, greet with a better
[greeting] than it or return it; surely Allah takes account of all
things.
for this reason its my duty to be grateful to you, your kindness, for
your great software and efferts for helping other people, and i offer
my gift to you.
for any question about the english translation of the holy quran, for
any question about the islam and your idea andyour experiment, be in
contact with me.
and for reading more books and morerecognition about islam, please
visit website.
this website has many useful books in different aspects of islam."

As someone else pointed out - this was NOT a signature - it was a SERMON and completely inappropriate and offensive to me and others (and NOT because of the particular superstition being proselytised).

P.

All Hail the Great and Glorious Jibbers Crabst!

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ_BtZ-5O60