On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 00:43 +0100, Christian Lohmaier wrote: > On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 06:21:07PM -0500, G. Roderick Singleton wrote: > > On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 00:05 +0100, Christian Lohmaier wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 05:39:45PM -0500, G. Roderick Singleton wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2005-11-04 at 22:58 +0100, Christian Lohmaier wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 04:43:03PM -0500, G. Roderick Singleton wrote: > > > > You do have a problem don't you. > > Yes. I have a problem. I have a problem with you. Or better: With your > way to responing on requests for more information to deal with a > specific problem you have. > > Let me make this clear: It is not only this current thread. It is a lots > of bits here and there, one of the more recent examples being issue > 55658 > > Whenever one tries *to help you*, it ends in a personal debate almost > everytime. > > Was with the setup-guide, was with issues you filed, is the same here. > Dealing with problems you raise up only is a waste of time because you > don't listen. Instead of simply writing: "Here's the page that has the > broken links" or "Sorry, don't know where to find them" you keep > repeating yourself, try to make this a battlefield (by accusing people > of not being interested in solving problems and all that stuff). Again: > not only in this thread, but repeatedly. That's a waste of time.
As yes the setup guide. You only wanted to have your way. In fact I found you so insistent it was annoying. So I see this as you can't get your way you become offensive and less help, if that is what you were trying to provide, as time went on. Well the setup guide does have what you wanted now that things stabilized as I said it would. So what is your point that I disagreed with you and are thus a target. GET A LIFE. > > > Please stop taking shots. It certainly > > doesn't put you in a good light. I personally do not care whether scdocs > > belongs to sourcecast or not. I do know that Alex identified that this > > was a possibility and so do not need you to parrot. > > Mail is not a realtime-medium. I wrote that message befor I got Alex > mail. > > So what exactly is your point to taking this attitude? > > The point is: *WE NEED THE PAGE THAT CONTAINS THE LINKS* to make useful > corrections. Nonsense, and you could have asked the op. Don't be so silly. You are trying to make a mountain out a mole hill for personal reasons. > > [...] You are making this personal and that is offensive. Please > > cease and desist. > > Don't worry - I will not see mails from you on new threads anymore that > are not direct replies to my posts. > > Plonk. > > ciao > Christian THis thread is one of your making. Not mine. YOu have tried to take shots. However I get it now. When anyone disagrees with you or asks for justification of your actions, you take offence. Too bad. YOu didn't answer so I lost interest. If you bring QA into the mix I have a problem with how you work. You go out of your way to dismiss issues and provide no information. Get a life. Again as far as this thread goes if you are not going to do anything, please leave it. You have a real problem that nothing I can do or say will change to remedy. Look at yourself before you start taking shots at others. -- PLEASE KEEP MESSAGES ON THE LIST. OpenOffice.org Documentation Co-Lead http://documentation.openoffice.org/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
