Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

I am replying to this once only on list. The atmosphere in a mailing list is set by the people in agreeing to abide by conventions of courtesy. One disagreeable poster cant taint the atmosphere for everyone else.

Email lacks all the signals of body language. So it is even more important to avoid emotion in words.

It is not an excuse to say that English is not the writer's first language. All languages have common words for 'stupid', 'illiterate', 'dumb', etc. Using these words transfers emotion in all languages.

On 03/04/2011 03:13 AM, MR ZenWiz wrote:
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 1:41 AM, Tom Davies<>  wrote:

Well said.
Really? Which part - where he read sarcasm and insult into a perfectly
neutral email offering assistance, or the part where you jumped in and
did exactly the same thing and bragged about it?
The mere fact that someone else supported what I said should be an indication to you that what you said was inappropriate. Your email was not neutral. If you are truly interested in discovering how to communicate in a less offensive manner, then an off-list question would have been appropriate. On-list you dig the hole deeper by coming off as defensive and insensitive.
Sorry i can't help with the specific problem.
Then kindly shut up and let people who can, do.
Saying 'shut up' is emotional and impolite; it is an example of a non-neutral posting. Think! If the poster is saying he is not responding to the question, then he is clearly conveying the fact that he cares about the manner in which the posting was made.
  It is well documented
and is apparently recommended that people uninstall OpenOffice before installing
LibreOffice so it surprises me that anyone expects different.
In certain circumstances, yes.  In others, no.
  Many apologies
for my colleagues rudeness but i fear that is the norm for this emailing list.
I don't need an apologist,
You most certainly do.
  but if I did, I'd find one who was actually
good at it.
Actually, the laid back approach worked fine with me, and if you had not come back with this posting, I would have said nothing more. So as an apologist he is good. That you didn't appreciate his response is something to be considered.
   Also, I consider people colleagues if they work with me,
which, so far, I have not seen you do.  As for the "norm," coming from
someone who refuses to abide by ANY of the email list conventions and
even pleads how inconvenient it is to provide good, clear instructions
properly quoted so as to be legible to future list/archive readers,
that's quite a statement.
This is an ad hominem attack on the poster, meaning that since you don't like the message, you attack the messenger. Ad hominem is a common method for creating controversy (and in the internet era, flame wars) because you move away from the initial topic and introduce other things to get people annoyed about. The biggest problem with ad hominem attacks is when those reading them do not recognise the technique. Once you can categorise such attempts to provoke controversy as an oratorical mechanism used even in ancient Greece, the language looses its sting. But then you wonder about the motivations of the person who says such things.
Smilies do not constitute good manners, nor are they a substitute for
same.  That's one reason I don't use them.  But, I guess expecting
anyone to be reasonable and not petty or petulant is beyond some
people's grasp.
The best way to explain a principle is to demonstrate it. But here assigning the words 'petty, petulant' to another person is the reverse of the principle. So, I agree smiles are no substitute for good manners, but neither are insinuations of pettiness, unreasonableness or petulance.
For the record, if someone needs help and I can help, I say so; if
someone is wrong and I know it, I say so.
In this we are exactly the same. And that is what I am trying to do now. But please note, I am also trying to use words as mild as milk and pointing out general principles.
   If I don't know how to help
but don't understand the problem because not enough information is
present for me to do anything with it, I say so.
I am with you in this too. And, if you think about it, that is exactly what the previous poster did when he said 'I cant help with the specific problem', but your reaction to that comment was ... (look and see).
   If I otherwise don't
know how to help, I shut up and wait for someone who does to post, and
then I try to learn from it if the subject is interesting to me.

If you don't like it, pretend you can do that last part unless you can
actually help, and do us all a favor and keep your opinions of other
people on this list to yourself
I have not said stated my opinion about anyone. That I said 'sarcasm is unwarranted' is not an opinion about a person, it is an opinion about a statement the person has made. There is a difference. People often say things without understanding the effect of their statements. That is understandable, children often say things they do not understand. But then, it is necessary for someone who sees the problem to point it out in a kind and understanding non-judgemental manner. This is as necessary in an internet list as it is when bringing up children. It matters because an internet list is a community, and the atmosphere in the community is created by the people who participate.
  - maybe if you start to set a good
example here I might be able to do the same.

I am trying to do exactly that here. I hope you can see and understand what it is I am trying to say.

Your technical help is certainly useful. The manner in which you offer the advice is offensive, and so you debase the value of your help.

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
List archive:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.