This email is one big "I can't really do what I said I could do, and would be easy to do" message. This is getting sad, Marco, it really is.
-CHad Smith On 7/25/05, M. Fioretti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 23:12:51 PM +0100, CPHennessy > ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > On Monday 25 July 2005 00:38, M. Fioretti wrote: > > > > > > May I friendly suggest, in YOUR interest, that you just stop cold > > > turkey running in this Guinea pig wheel for a couple of weeks, > > > and use that same time to ask for help directly to the procmail list > > > and/or some friend at the closest LUG? > > > > Thanks for your insighfulness Marco. If it was meant to encourage me > > to do something I'm really not sure. > > Of course it was meant to help. > > > But making fun of me (and others) helping OOo novice users will not > > help you. > > DISCLAIMER: Believe it or not, expecialy while reading the last part > of this message, I am *not* making fun of you. I am trying really hard > to help, politely suggesting what couldf be done. > > I am not making fun of *you* personally or any other volunteers. I > never did. I do appreciate, sincerely, all your good will and > devotion, and have never doubted of it. What I do have great > difficulties to take seriously is only the method which you all insist > using. I'm trying to help you and OO.o to change that. > > > I'm still waiting for you to ignore [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a few weeks to > > put a procmail solution together since you seem to know it so well. > > See? (Answering also to others) *this* attitude is exactly why I have > never bothered, in the past, to work out and test the details. The > attitude going from lack of interest from else who could actually run > it, saving his own time, to the several variations of "*I* don't > understand one bit of what you suggested, so *you* must be a puffed up > moron". > > Now let's be serious and practical, please. I have already explained > that since you are the one that should run it on your own Linux setup, > it would sensibly speed things up if *you* could spare a couple of > weeks from patroling the lists, and test/tweak the procmail > recipes. Yesterday I *did* subscribe to the procmail mailing list, to > ask for help from the gurus in that field. > > So, CPH, I friendly but seriously suggest again: > > 1) You subscribe today to the procmail mailing list: > http://mailman.rwth-aachen.de/mailman/listinfo/procmail, suspending > OO.o service for a couple of weeks. The world won't come to an end. > 2) I send the initial request to that list for help, explaining the > detail of the problem. > 3) You test on your box what they suggest > 4) I promise to help you directly for any "side" issue (initial > installation and configuration of procmail, sending test messages, > this kind of things) > > I will do 2) by myself in any case, just for the fun of it, but doing > it together as above would be much more effective. > > >Looking forward to you contributions, > > Looking forward to any real sign of willingness from the OO.o > volunteers/list moderators to change the status quo. > > So? What do you say? I am ready, are you? > > CIao, > Marco > > -- > Marco Fioretti mfioretti, at the server mclink.it > Fedora Core 3 for low memory http://www.rule-project.org/ > > Those who will be able to conquer software will be able to conquer the > world. -- Tadahiro Sekimoto, president, NEC Corp. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- -Chad Smith --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
