On 12/31/2010 11:38 PM, Richard L. Hess wrote:
I think it would be clearer if the above wonderful statement read:
TDF is FOR and NOT AGAINST:
FOR free software,
FOR the user,
FOR document freedom,
FOR open standards, and
NOT AGAINST proprietary software,
NOT AGAINST corporations,
NOT AGAINST
On 2010-12-31 8:18 AM, Italo Vignoli wrote:
TDF is FOR and not AGAINST: FOR free software, FOR the user, FOR
document freedom, FOR open standards, and not AGAINST proprietary
software, AGAINST corporations, AGAINST document lock in, AGAINST
closed document formats and standards.
Hi, Italo,
I
On 12/31/2010 08:29 AM, Mark wrote:
If you're here to help, help.
If not, go away. No one is forcing you to be here.
A little etiquette would not hurt you one bit, either.
Thanks, Marc. You are a wise guy. Thanks for stepping in with your
gentle reminder of a netiquette that should be implic
Hi Kate,
2010/12/31 Katheryne Draven :
> Fuck off all of you. How's that?
That's not the kind of language, that we all want to see here.
I am not a moderator of this list and I don't have any other authority
here, but I don't like this attitude you're showing here. I fully
agree with the stateme
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Katheryne Draven wrote:
> Fuck off all of you. How's that?
>
What is your purpose in being here at all? You have posted a few good
ideas, but when you spout off with absurd criticisms of OSs that have
little or nothing to do with LibreOffice as a product, suddenl
I was told this was just a bunch of losers living in their mother's
basements, still I thought I'd give a chance. They were right.
On 12/31/10, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 04:36:58AM +, Katheryne Draven wrote:
>> Fuck off all of you. How's that?
>
> Yup. Troll. NoOp was r
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 04:36:58AM +, Katheryne Draven wrote:
> Fuck off all of you. How's that?
Yup. Troll. NoOp was right.
--
Bob Holtzman
Key ID: 8D549279
"If you think you're getting free lunch,
check the price of the beer"
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 05:48:20PM -0800, Mark wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 06:46:58AM +, Katheryne Draven wrote:
> >> I"m not spreading FUD, I'm speaking from my experience. When I tried
> >> to introduce linux via ubuntu, it was
Fuck off all of you. How's that?
On 12/31/10, Mark wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 06:46:58AM +, Katheryne Draven wrote:
>>> I"m not spreading FUD, I'm speaking from my experience. When I tried
>>> to introduce linux via ubuntu, it
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 06:46:58AM +, Katheryne Draven wrote:
>> I"m not spreading FUD, I'm speaking from my experience. When I tried
>> to introduce linux via ubuntu, it was a disaster.
>>
>> However, given the amount of harsh/childish
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 06:46:58AM +, Katheryne Draven wrote:
> I"m not spreading FUD, I'm speaking from my experience. When I tried
> to introduce linux via ubuntu, it was a disaster.
>
> However, given the amount of harsh/childish comments (not you Tom)
> I'll keep my experiences to myself.
e not had
> problems with stability in Ubuntu.
>
> Regards from
> Tom :)
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Robert Holtzman
> To: users@libreoffice.org
> Sent: Wed, 29 December, 2010 23:29:11
> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Very unhappy camper
users@libreoffice.org
Sent: Wed, 29 December, 2010 23:29:11
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Very unhappy camper
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 03:47:52PM -0500, Katheryne Draven wrote:
> People, the ubuntus are inherently inferior versions of linux and have
> a tendency to crash often, especially if the g
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 03:47:52PM -0500, Katheryne Draven wrote:
> People, the ubuntus are inherently inferior versions of linux and have
> a tendency to crash often, especially if the gui is gnome. Please take
> this into consideration, first look at the environment before the
> application.
Hey
In an effort to avoid a genuinely stupid religious war, I'm going to
pass on your unnecessary personal opinion of Linux and GDM
distributions. It is irrelevant.
The particular PowerPoint show, which LO should run without crashing
anything, regardless of what the underlying OS, distribution or GDM
People, the ubuntus are inherently inferior versions of linux and have
a tendency to crash often, especially if the gui is gnome. Please take
this into consideration, first look at the environment before the
application.
Kate Draven
CyberPunk X Computers
On 12/28/10, Michel-André wrote:
> If wor
If worse comes to worse, boot with a live CD and copy your VM directory
for the critical machine to another machine.
Michel-André
**
Le 2010-12-28 20:29, Greg Madden a écrit :
On Tuesday 28 December 2010 02:18:37 pm MR ZenWiz wrote:
I just began the process of recovering fro
On Tuesday 28 December 2010 02:18:37 pm MR ZenWiz wrote:
> I just began the process of recovering from attempting to run a .ppt
> slideshow that crashed my machine.
>
> I attempted to run it once and it crashed Impress. I tried to run it
> again and it crashed my machine - hard. I now have a pa
Corrections:
1) I was running LO on the host, not in the VM.
2) It didn't actually crash the host, it crashed GNOME.
3) I wound up having to reboot the machine because VMWS is extremely
stubborn about letting go of what it thinks it owns.
I still contend that LO should not be crashing the windo
Shouldn't be using a beta version for critical stuff!
On Dec 28, 2010, at 6:19 PM, MR ZenWiz wrote:
> I just began the process of recovering from attempting to run a .ppt
> slideshow that crashed my machine.
>
> I attempted to run it once and it crashed Impress. I tried to run it
> again and it
I just began the process of recovering from attempting to run a .ppt
slideshow that crashed my machine.
I attempted to run it once and it crashed Impress. I tried to run it
again and it crashed my machine - hard. I now have a partially
unrecoverable VMWare Workstation VM that I critically need t
21 matches
Mail list logo