Re: [libreoffice-users] undo functionality

:) Funny enough I almost did the same but out of respect for your choice 
to keep things private, I chose not to. You've not given the same 
consideration so:

Heads up to this user - he has zero respect for the community, enjoys 
wasting everyone time, and wants to use the list as a means to waste 
everyone's time with a long novel (which I rightfully ignored). He 
clearly just is using a user support thread for a free and open source 
project powered by incredible volunteers as a means to complain and whine.

I stand by what I said - the product works for tens of millions of 
users, I use it daily for professional work, and I have zero will to 
read a multi-page rant from a verbose user that likes going WAY off 
topic. He seems to have a lot more time to waste than I do.


Warmest Regards,

Joel

On 6/1/2016 1:01 PM, B.S. wrote:
> Well then if you are going to respond like that, I am going to respond 
> in public.
>
>
> Joel Madero schreef op 01-06-2016 18:13:
> > I use LibreOffice daily for professional work - your subjective feelings
> > are irrelevant in this outside of imposing a common sense "duty" (as a
> > member of the open source world) to report whatever issues you have in a
> > polite way and then wait patiently for the people with the skills that
> > you don't have to fix the problems that they confirm. Tens of millions
> > of users are using the product daily for professional quality work -
> > you're in the minority.
>
>
> I wrote a message to Joel Madero in private because I didn't see it 
> fit to write anything more philosophical about the nature of open 
> source development on this list.
>
> I did mention to him that people like him could be held liable in the 
> end for acts they have committed, or didn't commit, such as false 
> advertizing, which this product is doing, like so many others, even if 
> there is not a form of direct contractual agreement in monetary terms, 
> or anything like it, at the present date, the way this system is 
> constructed.
>
> "No warranty" doesn't hold much water in a court of law if it actually 
> violates common principles.
>
> And I hope you do realize, that all of you, developers or not, could 
> be held liable for the work you do, and false advertizing you are a 
> part of, if the false promises you make on websites such as that of 
> this product, come down to costing people a lot of time and money, 
> because you make promises you do not actually live up to.
>
> And I stated these things because a form of reward is often implied in 
> using as well as creating open source products, and "no monetary gain" 
> is not a reality. People do this work and often get rewarded in other 
> forms, often as a form of investment or finding employment later down 
> the line. And I stated that everyone who is using open source material 
> is investing in the future, and the contract is often that something 
> may be free for now, but will yield rewards later down the line, or 
> will even require payment later down the line, because anyone who has 
> made a lot of money based on something free, will feel like paying 
> back on that.
>
> So I feel this "no responsibility" claim is just nonsense to begin 
> with. That is not how life works, and it is not how people work.
>
> If you put something out into the world, then accept responsibility 
> for it. And this is just common sense, but open source people often 
> try to reinvent common sense, and think they can do better than 
> anyone, because in some way they are distancing themselves from 
> corporate people, so they must be superior.
>
> "No liability" or "no warranty" is going to not work out in the end, 
> and you are going to get hurt for it. And this is a promise as well, 
> because you are hurting yourself, and no one else.
>
> Moreover, stating that in some way people (such as me) must be a good 
> 'sheep' and are required to speak politely (as if speaking to 
> superiors) and then "patiently wait" (as if open source is not about 
> active involvement) until others who "do have the skills" see fit to 
> spend their valuable time on issues that they confirm at their sole 
> discretion, basically without anyone else having a say, but moreover, 
> without any requirement to even /listen/ to anyone else outside of 
> their scope, including, basically, all users, I can only currently 
> qualify as extremely arrogant, and downright oppressive. And I feel 
> this user only made these statements because it was done in private, 
> whereas I didn't write my message with privacy in mind.
>
> If that is the picture you want to paint of yourself, fine, but then I 
> am not a part of that, or I am not a part of you.
>
> Moreover, this arrogance mostly results also, of his incorrect 
> assumption that I am not a developer myself, and his condescending 
> tone only results at this point from thinking I have no code 
> development skills in the first place. "Wait until people who do have 
> some skills to see fit to maybe maybe maybe design the feature you want".
>
> "You small man" you might add, and that would then apply to me. 
> Belittling users who have no coding skills in this fashion.... and 
> completely wrong in the first place, as it may be. Oh, you might say, 
> then why don't you say so! You might work for us! Suddenly the tone 
> changes and instead of filing bug reports (however mundane) I would 
> now be required to do that work myself, right?
>
> Free work!!
>
> Oops. Yes, as a user I might be thankful on my knees that these great 
> developers have even seen fit to create the product in the first 
> place, and that I, as an insignificant being, am even allowed to use 
> it, in the first place.
>
> Treated as some kind of worm, or some lowly being.
>
> "Your subjective feelings are irrelevant". Really. What if those 
> subjective feelings might in the end come down to work opportunity and 
> employment opportunity being lost for you, yourself? You are taking a 
> big gamble here man.
>
> Maybe the small fly ends up being something bigger than that.
>
> Funny, some people in positions of authority or power often pose as 
> small people to elicit responses like that. I don't know of many that 
> do. A Bishop in the united states, once attended his own Christmas 
> sermon dressed up as a beggar. After most of those good faith 
> Christians had tried to shoo him out of his own Christmas church, he 
> doffed his attire and proceeded to say that he didn't mean to shame 
> them, but all the same it should provide a lesson as to how people are 
> often judged by appearances, and that perhaps it should not be a right 
> thing to do. Unrelated here, but some C.E.O.'s do the same, I'm sure.
>
> This person says "feel free to report a bug" after saying that no one 
> is going to listen to it anyway.
>
> Since these are just "subjective feelings" anyway, and "millions of 
> users" that you never asked never complained about it to your knowledge.
>
> The question of whether something /should/ work in a certain way, is 
> apparently not important.
>
> And yes, people get fired for such things. However much you may 
> disagree with that, for instance, an employee for the Linux Foundation 
> was pretty much fired after publicly attacking the proposals of a 
> member (or sponsor) organisation. So I would say to watch your words, 
> and do not assume you can know whom you are talking to, or whether 
> something will not bite you in the end.
>
> A more sane and polite approach, yourself, might be advisable. Try to 
> act in a way in which you will never need to apologize, even if you 
> turn out to have been wrong. Try to assume best intents, and try to 
> assume knowledge on the part of the other. Also try to assume 
> competence, in the beginning. Try to assume that what someone is 
> saying, might actually have some merit. You might come much farther in 
> life, if you do so.
>
> And don't risk getting burned for some arrogance popping out in case 
> no one else can hear it, you think, or it is being said to someone who 
> doesn't matter anyway.
>
> And my name, it doesn't matter, but you can find out easily.
>
> And I am someone of complete insignificance, after all.
>
> Or, as dr. Evil liked to say, "The details of my life are 
> inconsequential".
>
> ;-).
>
> Regards, B.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted