Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #451200 > unrolled thread

More white oppression (which doesn't exist)

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy

Contents

  More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-11 16:05 -0400
    More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-11 14:16 -0700
      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-11 14:44 -0700
      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-12 10:23 -0400
        Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-12 07:28 -0700
        Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-12 10:37 -0700
          Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-12 14:17 -0400
            Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-12 15:24 -0700
              Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-15 08:51 -0500
                Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-15 07:11 -0700
                Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2018-05-15 20:39 +0200
                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-15 11:42 -0700
                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-15 11:53 -0700
                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-15 14:56 -0400
                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-15 12:14 -0700
                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2018-05-16 18:08 +0200
                      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-16 09:30 -0700
                        Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-16 09:35 -0700
                        Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-16 10:31 -0700
                        Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-16 10:42 -0700
                          Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-16 11:49 -0700
                          Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-16 12:30 -0700
                      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-16 16:19 -0400
                        Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-16 16:01 -0700
                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-15 12:47 -0700
                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-15 13:34 -0700
                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-15 13:57 -0700
                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-17 08:00 -0500
                      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-17 06:59 -0700
                      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-17 13:19 -0700
                        Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-18 09:23 -0500
                          Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2018-05-18 15:36 +0100
                          Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-18 08:45 -0700
                            Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-18 11:27 -0500
                              Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-18 09:39 -0700
                              Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-18 09:51 -0700
                            Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-18 09:47 -0700
                            Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-18 09:49 -0700
                              Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-19 03:44 -0700
                          Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-18 09:36 -0700
                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-17 07:10 -0500
                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-17 09:09 -0400
                      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-17 08:41 -0500
                        Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-17 07:00 -0700
                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-17 06:56 -0700
                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-18 02:59 -0700
                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-05-23 20:25 +0000
                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-23 13:38 -0700
                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-23 17:55 -0400
                Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-05-23 20:22 +0000
                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-23 13:37 -0700
                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-23 18:40 -0700
                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-24 06:27 -0700
                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-24 17:41 -0400
                      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-24 17:43 -0700
                        Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-24 20:18 -0700
                          Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-24 21:01 -0700
                            Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-24 21:32 -0700
                              Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-24 21:52 -0700
                              Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-24 22:06 -0700
                          Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-24 21:08 -0700
                        Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-25 08:00 -0400
                          Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-25 05:41 -0700
                            Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-25 09:14 -0400
                              Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) quatloo <quatloo@tribble.net> - 2018-05-25 09:14 -0500
                                Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 09:18 -0700
                                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 10:26 -0700
                                Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-25 16:45 -0400
                                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 14:13 -0700
                              Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 09:30 -0700
                                Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 10:48 -0700
                                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 10:59 -0700
                                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 11:11 -0700
                                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 11:25 -0700
                                      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 11:45 -0700
                                      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 13:23 -0700
                                      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 14:16 -0700
                            Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 07:51 -0700
                            Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 09:14 -0700
                            Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-25 14:34 -0500
                              Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-25 12:45 -0700
                                Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-25 14:48 -0500
                          Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 09:14 -0700
                        Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-25 07:01 -0500
                          Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-25 06:22 -0700
                            Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-25 08:50 -0500
                              Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-25 07:21 -0700
                              Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 09:27 -0700
                              Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-25 16:42 -0400
                                Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 14:05 -0700
                                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 20:04 -0700
                            Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 09:28 -0700
                            Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-25 16:41 -0400
                              Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 14:25 -0700
                              Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-25 15:42 -0700
                                Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 15:46 -0700
                                Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-26 11:48 -0400
                                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-26 09:01 -0700
                                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-26 09:06 -0700
                                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-26 12:11 -0400
                                      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-26 09:17 -0700
                                      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-26 19:21 -0700
                                        Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-27 09:07 -0400
                                          Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 06:34 -0700
                                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-26 09:16 -0700
                                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-26 20:22 -0700
                              Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-29 07:03 -0500
                                Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-29 08:05 -0400
                                  Andrzej Matuch averaged 6.8 Posts/Day, 216 last 30 days. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-05-29 06:23 -0700
                                    Re: Andrzej Matuch averaged 6.8 Posts/Day, 216 last 30 days. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 06:25 -0700
                                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-29 07:56 -0700
                                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 08:47 -0700
                                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-05-29 17:35 -0400
                                Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 05:22 -0700
                  Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-25 13:26 -0500
                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 11:30 -0700
                    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-25 12:28 -0700
                      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-25 14:35 -0500
                        Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-25 14:42 -0500
                          Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-25 12:48 -0700
                            Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-25 14:48 -0500
                      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-05-25 12:39 -0700
                        Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 14:17 -0700
                      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-25 14:26 -0700
    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-11 14:40 -0700
    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2018-05-12 13:00 +0000
      Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-12 06:09 -0700
        Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-12 08:31 -0700
    More right-wing crybaby illogic (which does exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-14 07:25 -0500
      Re: More right-wing crybaby illogic (which does exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-14 05:33 -0700
        Re: More right-wing crybaby illogic (which does exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 19:28 -0700
      Re: More right-wing crybaby illogic (which does exist) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-14 08:20 -0500
        Re: More right-wing crybaby illogic (which does exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-14 08:25 -0700
        Re: More right-wing crybaby illogic (which does exist) RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-05-23 20:19 +0000
          Re: More right-wing crybaby illogic (which does exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-23 13:37 -0700
      Re: More right-wing crybaby illogic (which does exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-14 08:26 -0700
      Re: More right-wing crybaby illogic (which does exist) RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-05-23 20:13 +0000
        Re: More right-wing crybaby illogic (which does exist) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-23 13:36 -0700
        Re: More right-wing crybaby illogic (which does exist) quatloo <quatloo@tribble.net> - 2018-05-23 17:42 -0500
          Re: More right-wing crybaby illogic (which does exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-23 19:00 -0700
          Re: More right-wing crybaby illogic (which does exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-24 02:50 -0700
    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-26 23:45 -0700
    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 01:52 -0700
    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 08:54 -0700
    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 22:41 -0700
    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 03:48 -0700
    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 14:31 -0700
      Tech question for Carroll Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-29 14:40 -0700
    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 17:07 -0700
    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 18:26 -0700
    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 18:57 -0700
    Re: More white oppression (which doesn't exist) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 21:02 -0700

Page 2 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8  Next page →

#451528

On 5/16/18 10:42 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 16, 2018 at 10:30:47 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>> On 5/16/18 9:08 AM, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>>>> I believe LibreOffice Draw was what was
>>>> proposed.
>>
>>> Works, takes 2 mouseclicks more than directly rotating it. Or use the plugin
>>
>> For anyone who wants to know the truth of how well, or poorly, it
>> works on LO (on Linux), I made this video (and it shows the plugin):
>> 
>> <https://youtu.be/i7Ad_9hzc7s>
>> 
>> And the development team knows of many of these bugs:
>> 
>> <https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92742>
>> <https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=115590>
>> <https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=115934>
>> 
>> To be fair, though, just found they have said that they have now made
>> a fix (as of 8 Feb of this year). I will have to test it and see!
>> 
>> <https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73797>> 
> 
> Hey, I recognize you! You're the 'database' guy, right?
> 
> <https://streamable.com/tr5jw>
> 
> ;)

Um, what? I do not see the relation. So to speak. :)




-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451534

On Wednesday, May 16, 2018 at 10:42:55 AM UTC-7, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 16, 2018 at 10:30:47 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> > On 5/16/18 9:08 AM, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
> > >> I believe LibreOffice Draw was what was
> > >> proposed.
> > 
> > > Works, takes 2 mouseclicks more than directly rotating it. Or use the plugin
> > 
> > For anyone who wants to know the truth 
> 
> Hey, I recognize you! You're the 'database' guy, right? 
> 
> <https://streamable.com/tr5jw>
> 
> ;)



No one here has ever read my program, much less found a bug; still, in the back of my mind, I'm thinking, "What if this is not my best work?", a secret I share with you only now. These types of trolls get their enjoyment out of drawing out emotional replies to their nonsense, which is the very definition of a troll. Already moved on from that. Take it as you want! You are as clever as a gibber monkey. John 'Super Troll' Gohde wants to hurt the whole group: If John 'Super Troll' Gohde can't play here then nobody will. Are you being like John 'Super Troll' Gohde on purpose? 

- 
What Every Entrepreneur Must Know!
http://www.5z8.info/nic_cage_naked_y8b5qk_torrentEverything
Jonas Eklundh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451540

On Wed, 16 May 2018 18:08:01 +0200, Peter Köhlmann
<peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

>Doomsdrzej wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 15 May 2018 20:39:34 +0200, Peter Köhlmann
>> <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>> 
>>>chrisv wrote:
>>>
>>>> -hh wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>The Snowflake protesth too much....
>>>> 
>>>> Hey, -highhorse, who, here, claimed that LibreOffice/OpenOffice is
>>>> "100% compatible" with MS-Office?
>>>
>>>Well, it isn't 100%. But pretty close.
>> 
>> Agreed.
>> 
>>>And it works way better to export OO-files to MS-format than the other way
>>>around (import OO-files from MSO)
>>>Not to talk about the *much* better capabilities of OO or LO for
>>>Macro-works compared to MSO. MSO is just plain shite when it comes to
>>>Macros in Documents
>> 
>> I wouldn't know but I'll confidently take your word for it. 
>
>6 month ago I had to build an application for a client. When it was done 
>there came 2 new requests: Build the document handling for MSO (was done by 
>LO), and switch the database from MySQL to PostGreSQL
>The database switching was relativly easy. The document was a lot of work, 
>with parts which are handled extremely poorly by MSO

Not entirely surprising considering how many examples of poor handling
of standards Microsoft has provided the computer world in the past
three decades. 

>The documents have dozens of graphics which need to be replaced for the 
>actual needed ones based on th eoutput of the application. Also text has to 
>be replaced, in one document about 2000 replacements of text
>
>The graphics part was pure, unadultered shite with MSO. On OO/LO every 
>grapphics in a document has a name and a path. You can reference it by name, 
>and you can alter the path to replace it on the fly with a different one.
>On MSO, tha name still exists, but then you can not alter any path.
>If you want to alter the path, you have to use a completely different 
>method, where you can access the grpahic only by index, not any name
>And the function is slow, compared to LO
>
>The text replacement functions work nearly the same in LO and MSO, only the 
>speed it vastly different. The document with around 2000 text replacements 
>runs in 11 seconds on LO (loading and new rendering with new grphics 
>included). The exact same looking document on MSO needs 180 seconds.
>
>Another point is: You can start as many docs with Macros as you want with 
>OO/LO.
>If you do the same with MSO, the first document is done correctly. All 
>following are done without any macros running, i.e. not at all.
>You actually have to wait until the first one is done, then you can start 
>the next one. Only possible way to circumvent that is to start new instances 
>of Word for each document, which will eat memory faster than you can blink 
>at. Unuseable shite.

The way I see it, once you decide to produce any sort of document with
MS software and you save it to one of their proprietary formats,
you've essentially given away all power over that document from that
point on. Clearly, you can continue editing it from within their
software or something compatible, but the ability to examine and
modify the finer details as you need to do is more or less impossible.

It's actually funny that we're discussing this since I'm at a private
school now and I was talking with the technician who makes all
technology-related suggestions to the administration at the school. We
both argued that things would be easier if people chose open formats
rather than insisting on using Apple formats or formats created by
Apple-exclusive software, but the teachers who don't understand how
much control they're giving away (or what they're locking themselves
into) seem to be the biggest challenges he faces. He was happy to see
that at least one teacher realizes that there is no freedom in
adopting closed software or formats. I gave him some pointers on how
to approach the administration to get them to adopt open formats but
we'll see how far that goes. In private schools, at least here in
Quebec, people seem to seek out "Apple certification" as if it's
something to be proud of.

>> All I know
>> is that I've never really faced an issue with LibreOffice so far other
>> than the rotations that Michael Glasser, vermin of Prescott, Arizona
>> mentioned. However, your workaround of simply rotating the image
>> elsewhere in the suite, despite being somewhat cumbersome in
>> comparison, does the job. 
>
>There is a plugin for OO/LO which rotates images by any angle you want
>I have yet to actually use it. It works fine, but I fail to have use cases 
>for it. 

Honestly, had Michael Glasser, vermin of Prescott, Arizona not pointed
it out, I probably would never have noticed that LibreOffice Writer
doesn't allow you to rotate an image being inserted into a document at
any angle other than 90 degrees. I can see the use of it, but rare are
the cases where a teacher needs for an image to be at a certain angle.
In the end, it's the information within the document that's important,
not the aesthetics. If a Snit complained that he can't read a document
because an image isn't "just so," I'd probably just remove images
altogether from all documents I produce going forward to spite him.
Only Michael Glasser, diseased rat of Prescott, Arizona truly cares
about such trivial stuff.

>> I believe LibreOffice Draw was what was
>> proposed. 
>
>Works, takes 2 mouseclicks more than directly rotating it. Or use the plugin

*2* mouse clicks? But what about improved productivity and
error-reduction?!

>> Clearly, Pages and Word do a better job with the rotations
>
>No, they do not. You take Snit Michael Glassers word for it. As he lies even 
>when the truth would be better, you get lies. And lies. And lies
>
>He knows absolutely nothing about the stuff he is blubbering about. He just 
>claims to know. In reality he has no idea, as he has never used any linux 
>software long enough (and recent enough) to have even a scant idea about its 
>capabilities

To his credit, he did show what he was referring to though we all had
to sit through minutes of his irritating nasal voice to see it.

I'll have to try it out myself to get the best idea but I sincerely
doubt that you're wrong.

>> but I'm wondering if that's worth the price tag if it is one of the
>> few benefits that it provides.
>
>There is no benefit. The plugin costs as much as OO/LO
>And does a fine job (if you are foolishly enough to rotate images 
>nillywilly)

It's all people who live in Prescott, Arizona do with their whole days
when they're not trolling Usenet.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451544

On 5/16/18 1:19 PM, Doomsdrzej wrote:
...
> The way I see it, once you decide to produce any sort of document with
> MS software and you save it to one of their proprietary formats,
> you've essentially given away all power over that document from that
> point on. Clearly, you can continue editing it from within their
> software or something compatible, but the ability to examine and
> modify the finer details as you need to do is more or less impossible.

What proprietary formats do you mean? The current standard for MS Office 
is an open standard -- and they have used it for years.

> It's actually funny that we're discussing this since I'm at a private
> school now and I was talking with the technician who makes all
> technology-related suggestions to the administration at the school. We
> both argued that things would be easier if people chose open formats
> rather than insisting on using Apple formats or formats created by
> Apple-exclusive software, but the teachers who don't understand how
> much control they're giving away (or what they're locking themselves
> into) seem to be the biggest challenges he faces. He was happy to see
> that at least one teacher realizes that there is no freedom in
> adopting closed software or formats. I gave him some pointers on how
> to approach the administration to get them to adopt open formats but
> we'll see how far that goes. In private schools, at least here in
> Quebec, people seem to seek out "Apple certification" as if it's
> something to be proud of.

A couple of topics there:

* Yes: Apple formats are proprietary.
* Yes, it is good to be educated, and that what an Apple certification 
is (not that it is the only tech certification that matters or that one 
has to be educated in tech).

>>> All I know
>>> is that I've never really faced an issue with LibreOffice so far other
>>> than the rotations that Michael Glasser, vermin of Prescott, Arizona
>>> mentioned. However, your workaround of simply rotating the image
>>> elsewhere in the suite, despite being somewhat cumbersome in
>>> comparison, does the job.
>>
>> There is a plugin for OO/LO which rotates images by any angle you want
>> I have yet to actually use it. It works fine, but I fail to have use cases
>> for it.
> 
> Honestly, had Michael Glasser, vermin of Prescott, Arizona not pointed
> it out, I probably would never have noticed that LibreOffice Writer
> doesn't allow you to rotate an image being inserted into a document at
> any angle other than 90 degrees.

But many others had. And with LO 3 one of the big "selling" points is 
you can now rotate images at arbitrary angles.

You STILL cannot do so with direct selection (though likely the plug-in 
allows this) and you cannot move them in real time. The rotation is a 
bit jumpy but not too bad.

> I can see the use of it, but rare are
> the cases where a teacher needs for an image to be at a certain angle.

Depends on the topic, taste, etc. And, of course, if you use tools which 
make it harder are less likely to do it. There was active discussion on 
this in the bug tracker -- it clearly is a sought after feature.

> In the end, it's the information within the document that's important,
> not the aesthetics. If a Snit complained that he can't read a document
> because an image isn't "just so," I'd probably just remove images
> altogether from all documents I produce going forward to spite him.

If... key word. You were making odd speculations to push trolling.

> Only Michael Glasser, diseased rat of Prescott, Arizona truly cares
> about such trivial stuff.

Clearly others care:

<https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73797>

And it is one of the key updates they note in LO v6

<https://youtu.be/YHBve8v13VY?t=2m5s>

So this "non-problem" has not only been (to some extent) fixed, but it 
is seen as one of the key improvements in the new version (though to be 
fair there are certainly other features being highlighted more).

>>> I believe LibreOffice Draw was what was
>>> proposed.
>>
>> Works, takes 2 mouseclicks more than directly rotating it. Or use the plugin
> 
> *2* mouse clicks? But what about improved productivity and
> error-reduction?!

Keep in mind Peter has NO clue what he is talking about. None. He makes 
things up and ignores the actual issue.

>>> Clearly, Pages and Word do a better job with the rotations
>>
>> No, they do not. You take Snit Michael Glassers word for it. As he lies even
>> when the truth would be better, you get lies. And lies. And lies
>>
>> He knows absolutely nothing about the stuff he is blubbering about. He just
>> claims to know. In reality he has no idea, as he has never used any linux
>> software long enough (and recent enough) to have even a scant idea about its
>> capabilities
> 
> To his credit, he did show what he was referring to though we all had
> to sit through minutes of his irritating nasal voice to see it.

Ah, you cannot help but push insults as you admit you know I am right. 
LOL! Keep in mind YOUR reaction when you first say how easy it was on 
Pages: you were ready to go buy a Mac! I showed you it can also be done 
on Word, even if not quite as smoothly.

> I'll have to try it out myself to get the best idea but I sincerely
> doubt that you're wrong.

Of course he is wrong. He is on almost every tech thing he says.

He is more right on politics... and you loath his views on that. :)

>>> but I'm wondering if that's worth the price tag if it is one of the
>>> few benefits that it provides.
>>
>> There is no benefit. The plugin costs as much as OO/LO
>> And does a fine job (if you are foolishly enough to rotate images
>> nillywilly)
> 
> It's all people who live in Prescott, Arizona do with their whole days
> when they're not trolling Usenet.

As is his norm, Peter has NO clue what he is talking about in terms of 
tech. None.

Peter shows NO sign of understanding the image rotation change in the 
LO6 update (which, I admit, I only learned about today) and he shows no 
understanding of the plugin. Here, how it was before LO6.

<https://youtu.be/i7Ad_9hzc7s>

Is there EVER a time Peter is right about tech? I make my share of 
absurd errors (PGP quotes coming up from others, no doubt) but I openly 
admit it when they are pointed out (and, if needed, shown). Peter will 
NEVER admit to his errors. He is too insecure.


-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451442

1:39 PMPeter Köhlmann wrote: 
> chrisv wrote:
>> -hh wrote: 
>>>The Snowflake protesth too much.... 
>> 
>> Hey, -highhorse, who, here, claimed that LibreOffice/OpenOffice is 
>> "100% compatible" with MS-Office? 

Wouldn’t really know that today.  I’m on holiday and don’t have the time or interest to 
go research just what specific thread (if it actually exists) what statement was made in 
what context.  But in any case, most of the Linux advocate slip-ups have been from 
making absolutionist claims which brook no compromise.  

> Well, it isn't 100%. But pretty close. 
> And it works way better to export OO-files to MS-format than the other way 
> around (import OO-files from MSO) 
> Not to talk about the *much* better capabilities of OO or LO for Macro-works 
> compared to MSO. MSO is just plain shite when it comes to Macros in 
> Documents 

Personally, I saw enough when that contractor I mentioned had a presentation 
melt-down which traced back to their spreadsheet data not transforming properly 
into a graph in PowerPoint.

>> Who, here, claimed that GIMP is "equal to" Photoshop? 
>
> For the majority of users it is better than PhotoShop, as it does not have 
> that steep learning curve to be mastered 

Odd then how COLA comments have mentioned “high cost” a thousand times, 
but differences in learning curve but only once /s

> It is naturally not "equal" to it. 

IMO, it’s equivalence is closer to PS Elements.

>> No verbose bullshit, just give a name and an exact quote, or, better 
>> yet, a message ID. 

Good point:  please provide the relevant cite from your alleged quote, chrisv.
And do it every time you use one of those .sig files, to illustrate that you’re not 
a chronic hypocrite.

>> If you think that you can beat us with your lies, you are fooling 
>> yourself, -highhorse. 

Why lie when using the truth is more definitive?


> Well, it is a harsh existence for him, to be wrong 99% of the time 

Merely wishful thinking on your part, again, Peter, and case in point:  
Remember this one?

<http://huntzinger.com/photo/2014/brac/IMG_6868-cola.jpg>

If memory serves, it was because you tried to suggest that there was 
an open relay at that IP address...because the idea of someone being 
simply on a vacation is so foreign to you?  But that suggestion doesn’t 
explain the photo at all.  Nor being here yet again this year.  Need I waste 
another paper plate to have a 2018 version of the same photo?


-hh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451447

On 5/15/18 12:47 PM, -hh wrote:
> 
> 1:39 PMPeter Köhlmann wrote:
>> chrisv wrote:
>>> -hh wrote:
>>>> The Snowflake protesth too much....
>>>
>>> Hey, -highhorse, who, here, claimed that LibreOffice/OpenOffice is
>>> "100% compatible" with MS-Office?
> 
> Wouldn’t really know that today.  I’m on holiday and don’t have the time or interest to
> go research just what specific thread (if it actually exists) what statement was made in
> what context.  But in any case, most of the Linux advocate slip-ups have been from
> making absolutionist claims which brook no compromise.
> 
>> Well, it isn't 100%. But pretty close.
>> And it works way better to export OO-files to MS-format than the other way
>> around (import OO-files from MSO)
>> Not to talk about the *much* better capabilities of OO or LO for Macro-works
>> compared to MSO. MSO is just plain shite when it comes to Macros in
>> Documents
> 
> Personally, I saw enough when that contractor I mentioned had a presentation
> melt-down which traced back to their spreadsheet data not transforming properly
> into a graph in PowerPoint.

It is not only NOT 100%, it is trivial to show examples where it 
fails... with images, tables, pagination, borders, even spacing between 
paragraphs is often off, as is font rendering (on the same system). 
Maybe it has been fixed, but even the "justify" option can lead to 
incompatibilities.

>>> Who, here, claimed that GIMP is "equal to" Photoshop?
>>
>> For the majority of users it is better than PhotoShop, as it does not have
>> that steep learning curve to be mastered
> 
> Odd then how COLA comments have mentioned “high cost” a thousand times,
> but differences in learning curve but only once /s

And in the past I was told learning curves are only an issue for idiots, 
etc.

>> It is naturally not "equal" to it.
> 
> IMO, it’s equivalence is closer to PS Elements.

Correct.

>>> No verbose bullshit, just give a name and an exact quote, or, better
>>> yet, a message ID.
> 
> Good point:  please provide the relevant cite from your alleged quote, chrisv.
> And do it every time you use one of those .sig files, to illustrate that you’re not
> a chronic hypocrite.
> 
>>> If you think that you can beat us with your lies, you are fooling
>>> yourself, -highhorse.
> 
> Why lie when using the truth is more definitive?
> 
> 
>> Well, it is a harsh existence for him, to be wrong 99% of the time
> 
> Merely wishful thinking on your part, again, Peter, and case in point:
> Remember this one?
> 
> <http://huntzinger.com/photo/2014/brac/IMG_6868-cola.jpg>
> 
> If memory serves, it was because you tried to suggest that there was
> an open relay at that IP address...because the idea of someone being
> simply on a vacation is so foreign to you?  But that suggestion doesn’t
> explain the photo at all.  Nor being here yet again this year.  Need I waste
> another paper plate to have a 2018 version of the same photo?

Shall I pull up the MANY quotes of Peter being idiotic that I saved as 
he made the same insults against me? :)


-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451451

On Tuesday, May 15, 2018 at 12:47:25 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> 1:39 PMPeter Köhlmann wrote: 
> > chrisv wrote:
> >> -hh wrote: 
> >>>The Snowflake protesth too much.... 
> >> 
> >> Hey, -highhorse, who, here, claimed that LibreOffice/OpenOffice is 
> >> "100% compatible" with MS-Office? 
> 
> Wouldn’t really know that today.  I’m on holiday and don’t have the time or interest to 
> go research just what specific thread (if it actually exists) what statement was made in 
> what context.  But in any case, most of the Linux advocate slip-ups have been from 
> making absolutionist claims which brook no compromise.  
> 
> > Well, it isn't 100%. But pretty close. 
> > And it works way better to export OO-files to MS-format than the other way 
> > around (import OO-files from MSO) 
> > Not to talk about the *much* better capabilities of OO or LO for Macro-works 
> > compared to MSO. MSO is just plain shite when it comes to Macros in 
> > Documents 
> 
> Personally, I saw enough when that contractor I mentioned had a presentation 
> melt-down which traced back to their spreadsheet data not transforming properly 
> into a graph in PowerPoint.
> 
> >> Who, here, claimed that GIMP is "equal to" Photoshop? 
> >
> > For the majority of users it is better than PhotoShop, as it does not have 
> > that steep learning curve to be mastered 
> 
> Odd then how COLA comments have mentioned “high cost” a thousand times, 
> but differences in learning curve but only once /s
> 
> > It is naturally not "equal" to it. 
> 
> IMO, it’s equivalence is closer to PS Elements.
> 
> >> No verbose bullshit, just give a name and an exact quote, or, better 
> >> yet, a message ID. 
> 
> Good point:  please provide the relevant cite from your alleged quote, chrisv.
> And do it every time you use one of those .sig files, to illustrate that you’re not 
> a chronic hypocrite.
> 
> >> If you think that you can beat us with your lies, you are fooling 
> >> yourself, -highhorse. 
> 
> Why lie when using the truth is more definitive?
> 
> 
> > Well, it is a harsh existence for him, to be wrong 99% of the time 
> 
> Merely wishful thinking on your part, again, Peter, and case in point:  
> Remember this one?
> 
> <http://huntzinger.com/photo/2014/brac/IMG_6868-cola.jpg>
> 
> If memory serves, it was because you tried to suggest that there was 
> an open relay at that IP address...because the idea of someone being 
> simply on a vacation is so foreign to you?  But that suggestion doesn’t 
> explain the photo at all.  Nor being here yet again this year.  Need I waste 
> another paper plate to have a 2018 version of the same photo?
> 
> 
> -hh



Usenet is a free institution based on shared ethics. 

In fact vallor's lies got bigger. So obviously I regret writing software for vallor. While I am sure his wife approved of it, I've not helped the situation at all. 

Just rubbish from him. But vallor has completely left objectivity behind and is merely holding me at fault for the deeds of himself. Oh goodness, that is just tons of malarky. 



--
Best CMS Solution of 2017
https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/6sfhq6/what_desktop_tasks_does_linux_handle_better_than/
http://www.5z8.info/freeanimalporn.com-start-download_s9j7do_dogporn
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.os.linux/BVpdH5KOc6s
Jonas Eklundh Communication AB

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451567

lying asshole "-hh" wrote:

>Peter Köhlmann wrote: 
>>
>> chrisv wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hey, -highhorse, who, here, claimed that LibreOffice/OpenOffice is 
>>> "100% compatible" with MS-Office? 
>
>Wouldn’t really know that today.  I’m on holiday and don’t have the time or interest to 
>go research just what specific thread (if it actually exists) what statement was made in 
>what context.  

You never knew, -highhorse, because no one did.  You lied.

>But in any case, most of the Linux advocate slip-ups have been from 
>making absolutionist claims which brook no compromise.

How ironic, considering it's you, doing exactly that, which makes it
so easy to prove that you are a liar.

>>> Who, here, claimed that GIMP is "equal to" Photoshop? 
>>
>> For the majority of users it is better than PhotoShop, as it does not have 
>> that steep learning curve to be mastered 
>
>Odd then how COLA comments have mentioned “high cost” a thousand times, 
>but differences in learning curve but only once /s

How odd that you claim it's odd that he chose to make a different
point than the usual value-based point.

Don't try to change the subject, which is your dishonest attacks on
the advocates.

>>> No verbose bullshit, just give a name and an exact quote, or, better 
>>> yet, a message ID. 
>
>Good point:  please provide the relevant cite from your alleged quote, chrisv.
>And do it every time you use one of those .sig files, to illustrate that you’re not 
>a chronic hypocrite.

Above I state that "a name and an exact quote" would suffice.  I
provide those, in my .sig's.

Once again, you have illustrated that you are a chronically dishonest
asshole, -highhorse.

>>> If you think that you can beat us with your lies, you are fooling 
>>> yourself, -highhorse. 
>
> Why lie when using the truth is more definitive?

You lie because you must, to attack decent, honest, reasonable
advocates of FOSS.

-- 
"Anyone who claims that LibreOffice/OpenOffice is 100% compatible
with MS-Office is fooling themselves. Ditto that GIMP is equal to
Photoshop."  -  lying asshole "-hh"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451572

On 5/17/18 6:00 AM, chrisv wrote:
> lying asshole "-hh" wrote:
> 
>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>>>
>>> chrisv wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hey, -highhorse, who, here, claimed that LibreOffice/OpenOffice is
>>>> "100% compatible" with MS-Office?
>>
>> Wouldn’t really know that today.  I’m on holiday and don’t have the time or interest to
>> go research just what specific thread (if it actually exists) what statement was made in
>> what context.
> 
> You never knew, -highhorse, because no one did.  You lied.
> 
>> But in any case, most of the Linux advocate slip-ups have been from
>> making absolutionist claims which brook no compromise.
> 
> How ironic, considering it's you, doing exactly that, which makes it
> so easy to prove that you are a liar.
> 
>>>> Who, here, claimed that GIMP is "equal to" Photoshop?
>>>
>>> For the majority of users it is better than PhotoShop, as it does not have
>>> that steep learning curve to be mastered
>>
>> Odd then how COLA comments have mentioned “high cost” a thousand times,
>> but differences in learning curve but only once /s
> 
> How odd that you claim it's odd that he chose to make a different
> point than the usual value-based point.
> 
> Don't try to change the subject, which is your dishonest attacks on
> the advocates.
> 
>>>> No verbose bullshit, just give a name and an exact quote, or, better
>>>> yet, a message ID.
>>
>> Good point:  please provide the relevant cite from your alleged quote, chrisv.
>> And do it every time you use one of those .sig files, to illustrate that you’re not
>> a chronic hypocrite.
> 
> Above I state that "a name and an exact quote" would suffice.  I
> provide those, in my .sig's.
> 
> Once again, you have illustrated that you are a chronically dishonest
> asshole, -highhorse.
> 
>>>> If you think that you can beat us with your lies, you are fooling
>>>> yourself, -highhorse.
>>
>> Why lie when using the truth is more definitive?
> 
> You lie because you must, to attack decent, honest, reasonable
> advocates of FOSS.

   chrisv:
     -----
     That thing won't even acknowledge that virtual desktops are a very
     nice feature.  It claims that they require "too much configuration".

     You see, they require that you decide how to organize things on the
     desktops.

     In other words, in order to enjoy the benefit of a tool, you must
     actually use the tool.

     Sheesh.
     -----

Surely you will provide "a name and an exact quote", right?

No. You did what you accuse others of doing. And what do you say of 
people who do as you accuse?

   chrisv:
     -----
     Once again, you have illustrated that you are a
     chronically dishonest asshole
     -----

What a way to describe people who act like you do!

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451618

chrisv wrote:
> lying asshole "-hh" wrote: 

YA example of childish & lame name-calling.

>>Peter Köhlmann wrote: 
>>> chrisv wrote: 
>>>> 
>>>> Hey, -highhorse, who, here, claimed that LibreOffice/OpenOffice is 
>>>> "100% compatible" with MS-Office? 
>> 
>>Wouldn’t really know that today.  I’m on holiday and don’t have the time or interest to 
>>go research just what specific thread (if it actually exists) what statement was made in 
>>what context.   
> 
>You never knew, -highhorse, because no one did.  You lied. 

Oh, look:  chrisv is upset because I’m able to afford to take vacations.

Sorry, but you merely making a claim doesn’t make it true.  And you’ve 
avoided actually providing the cite so that people can read for themselves 
what the original statement and context was.  You’ve done such a good job 
of being a legitimate ‘advocate’ /s.

>>But in any case, most of the Linux advocate slip-ups have been from 
>>making absolutionist claims which brook no compromise. 
>
> How ironic, considering it's you, doing exactly that, which makes it 
> so easy to prove that you are a liar. 

Once again, just because you make a claim does not make it true.
Logic failure #2.

>>>> Who, here, claimed that GIMP is "equal to" Photoshop? 
>>> 
>>> For the majority of users it is better than PhotoShop, as it does not have 
>>> that steep learning curve to be mastered 
>> 
>>Odd then how COLA comments have mentioned “high cost” a thousand times, 
>>but differences in learning curve but only once /s 
>
> How odd that you claim it's odd that he chose to make a different 
> point than the usual value-based point. 

Hint:  “/s” connotes sarcasm.  Linux’s command line interface has a 
horrendous learning curve, yet the CLI gets touted as a feature.  
Amazingly odd how there’s a double standard, eh? /s

> Don't try to change the subject, which is your dishonest attacks on 
> the advocates. 

No need to, since you already did change the subject from the OP,
which again reveals just who is really the hypocrite.

>>>> No verbose bullshit, just give a name and an exact quote, or, better 
>>>> yet, a message ID. 
>> 
>>Good point:  please provide the relevant cite from your alleged quote, chrisv. 
>>And do it every time you use one of those .sig files, to illustrate that you’re not 
>>a chronic hypocrite. 
>
> Above I state that "a name and an exact quote" would suffice.  I 
> provide those, in my .sig's. 

Except that you then said:  “or better yet, a message ID.”.  

That’s akin to using best business practices.  Perhaps you should try it 
sometime, so that you get ahead in life and lower your impotent anger.
Or better yet, use a Google URL link to their permanent archives, since 
newsreaders do expire.  Plus it facilitate those who use this ‘Linux Company’ 
Usenet product.

> Once again, you have illustrated that you are a chronically dishonest 
> asshole, -highhorse. 

Perhaps in your addled dreams., but not IRL.

>>>> If you think that you can beat us with your lies, you are fooling 
>>>> yourself, -highhorse. 
>> 
>> Why lie when using the truth is more definitive? 
>
> You lie because you must, to attack decent, honest, reasonable 
> advocates of FOSS. 

Irrelevant, as there’s not ever been any proof of there actually  being 
any “decent, honest, reasonable advocates of FOSS” on COLA.  
Perhaps you’re referring to some other discussion forum?  /s


-hh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451684

-hh wrote:

> (snipped, unread)

Nothing that I wrote can be honestly disputed.  No reason to read some
asshole's lashing-out to save face.  

I've already read one shitty, unfair attack from you, asshole,
implying that I'm a "hypocrite" because I don't provide the message
ID's for my .sig quotes.

Nothing requires me to provide message ID's, asshole.  I provide
actual quotes, not made-up shit.  Unlike your lying ilk, asshole.

The "absolutionist claims which brook no compromise" that I have
noticed are from shitty trolls, twisting what the advocates have said,
to attack them as "unreasonable" or whatever.

I'm sure that there have been, among the thousands of advocates posts,
some carelessly-worded statements, and even some unreasonable
statements.

But no one here ever thought, or seriously claimed, that
LibreOffice/OpenOffice is "100% compatible" with MS-Office.  Ditto for
the claim that GIMP is "equal to" Photoshop.

And you know it, asshole.

-- 
'Chrisv was basically whining about things having "too much"
maintenance, which essentially was an assertion that he wants
everything to be maintenance free...'  -  lying asshole "-hh", lying
shamelessly

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451685

On 18/5/2018 15:23 in comp.os.linux.advocacy, chrisv posted:

> -hh wrote:
>
>> (snipped, unread)
>
> Nothing that I wrote can be honestly disputed.  No reason to read some
> asshole's lashing-out to save face.  
>
> I've already read one shitty, unfair attack from you, asshole,
> implying that I'm a "hypocrite" because I don't provide the message
> ID's for my .sig quotes.
>
> Nothing requires me to provide message ID's, asshole.  I provide
> actual quotes, not made-up shit.  Unlike your lying ilk, asshole.
>
> The "absolutionist claims which brook no compromise" that I have
> noticed are from shitty trolls, twisting what the advocates have said,
> to attack them as "unreasonable" or whatever.
>
> I'm sure that there have been, among the thousands of advocates posts,
> some carelessly-worded statements, and even some unreasonable
> statements.
>
> But no one here ever thought, or seriously claimed, that
> LibreOffice/OpenOffice is "100% compatible" with MS-Office.  Ditto for
> the claim that GIMP is "equal to" Photoshop.
>
> And you know it, asshole.

Comparison -  LibreOffice vs Microsoft_Office

https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Feature_Comparison:_LibreOffice_-_Microsoft_Office

-- 
"Threatening an atheist with hellfire, 
is no more effective than a hippie 
threatening to punch him in his aura."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451688

chrisv wrote:
> -hh wrote: 
>> (snipped, unread) 

Since Chris then went on to dispute things which were said, he’s either lying, 
or I’m living rent free in his head ;-)

> Nothing that I wrote can be honestly disputed.  No reason to read some 
> asshole's lashing-out to save face.   

He said to try to save face.  And why dispute chrisv’s claims when it’s
usually straightforward to just debunk them?

> I've already read one shitty, unfair attack from you, asshole, 
> implying that I'm a "hypocrite" because I don't provide the message 
> ID's for my .sig quotes. 

Case in point:  my comment about providing Message IDs was in the post 
that chrisv just literally said was “snipped, unread”.  QED.


> Nothing requires me to provide message ID's, asshole.  

Except for using best practices.  Keep that in mind next time to try to whine 
about someone else’s (usually Microsoft for you) “Kwality” 

Oh, and your personal credibility takes a hit whenever you can’t substantiate after a call for a cite.


> I provide actual quotes, not made-up shit.  Unlike your lying ilk, asshole. 

Unsubstantiated claim; cite please.  Now if only chrisv had had a URL link to make that citation...!

> The "absolutionist claims which brook no compromise" that I have 
> noticed are from shitty trolls, twisting ...

Oh, so then you’re confessing to being one of said “shitty trolls”!  Good for you!

> I'm sure that there have been, among the thousands of advocates posts, 
> some carelessly-worded statements, and even some unreasonable 
> statements. 

And just how often has it been that when these have been called out that the 
resulting behavior has been anything other than admitting to a mistake?  

> But no one here ever thought, or seriously claimed, that 
> LibreOffice/OpenOffice is "100% compatible" with MS-Office.  Ditto for 
> the claim that GIMP is "equal to" Photoshop. 

Oh look:  chrisv has tried to move the goalposts to be that we’re the ones who 
are now being expected to prove intent, or to figure out when a claim was a normal 
one or a “serious” one.  That’s bullshit and utterly lame.

> And you know it, asshole. 

The Princess - she doth yon again protesteth too much!  /s


-hh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451689

-hh wrote:

> (snipped, unread)

Say, -highhorse, have advocates *really* argued that if you were to
just try Linux, you would find it compelling?  Do advocates *really*
not understand that Linux is not the best choice for everyone?  Do
advocates *really* get "pissed off" at people who try Linux, but
choose to use something else?

You sure lie a lot, -highhorse.

-- 
'I've used Linux for awhile; it failed to be compelling so I moved on.
This really pisses off the COLA boys because their "..but if you were
to just TRY it.." argument has been applied and they still failed.'  -
lying asshole "-hh", lying shamelessly

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451692

Gosh, the pwned one is really pissed off today.  
Must be from using Linux!  /s

Oh, and more attempts to change the subject...again.  
Dare one mention the hypocrisy...again?
“Snipped, unread” forthcoming...again!

-hh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451695

On 5/18/18 9:27 AM, chrisv wrote:
> -hh wrote:
> 
>> (snipped, unread)
> 
> Say, -highhorse, have advocates *really* argued that if you were to
> just try Linux, you would find it compelling?  Do advocates *really*
> not understand that Linux is not the best choice for everyone?  Do
> advocates *really* get "pissed off" at people who try Linux, but
> choose to use something else?
> 
> You sure lie a lot, -highhorse.
> 
I am continually attacked for not using Linux exclusively. I use it, but 
I also use macOS. Oh no!


-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451693

On Friday, May 18, 2018 at 8:45:31 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> chrisv wrote:
> > -hh wrote: 
> >> (snipped, unread) 
> 
> Since Chris then went on to dispute things which were said, he’s either lying, 
> or I’m living rent free in his head ;-)
> 
> > Nothing that I wrote can be honestly disputed.  No reason to read some 
> > asshole's lashing-out to save face.   
> 
> He said to try to save face.  And why dispute chrisv’s claims when it’s
> usually straightforward to just debunk them?
> 
> > I've already read one shitty, unfair attack from you, asshole, 
> > implying that I'm a "hypocrite" because I don't provide the message 
> > ID's for my .sig quotes. 
> 
> Case in point:  my comment about providing Message IDs was in the post 
> that chrisv just literally said was “snipped, unread”.  QED.
> 
> 
> > Nothing requires me to provide message ID's, asshole.  
> 
> Except for using best practices.  Keep that in mind next time to try to whine 
> about someone else’s (usually Microsoft for you) “Kwality” 
> 
> Oh, and your personal credibility takes a hit whenever you can’t substantiate after a call for a cite.
> 
> 
> > I provide actual quotes, not made-up shit.  Unlike your lying ilk, asshole. 
> 
> Unsubstantiated claim; cite please.  Now if only chrisv had had a URL link to make that citation...!
> 
> > The "absolutionist claims which brook no compromise" that I have 
> > noticed are from shitty trolls, twisting ...
> 
> Oh, so then you’re confessing to being one of said “shitty trolls”!  Good for you!
> 
> > I'm sure that there have been, among the thousands of advocates posts, 
> > some carelessly-worded statements, and even some unreasonable 
> > statements. 
> 
> And just how often has it been that when these have been called out that the 
> resulting behavior has been anything other than admitting to a mistake?  
> 
> > But no one here ever thought, or seriously claimed, that 
> > LibreOffice/OpenOffice is "100% compatible" with MS-Office.  Ditto for 
> > the claim that GIMP is "equal to" Photoshop. 
> 
> Oh look:  chrisv has tried to move the goalposts to be that we’re the ones who 
> are now being expected to prove intent, or to figure out when a claim was a normal 
> one or a “serious” one.  That’s bullshit and utterly lame.
> 
> > And you know it, asshole. 
> 
> The Princess - she doth yon again protesteth too much!  /s
> 
> 
> -hh



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Does this verify?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
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=8eSw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
"You'll notice how quickly he loses interest when everything is about him. He clearly wants the attention"
Steven Petruzzellis, making the dumbest comment ever uttered.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451694

On 5/18/18 8:45 AM, -hh wrote:
> 
> chrisv wrote:
>> -hh wrote:
>>> (snipped, unread)
> 
> Since Chris then went on to dispute things which were said, he’s either lying,
> or I’m living rent free in his head ;-)
> 
>> Nothing that I wrote can be honestly disputed.  No reason to read some
>> asshole's lashing-out to save face.
> 
> He said to try to save face.  And why dispute chrisv’s claims when it’s
> usually straightforward to just debunk them?
> 
>> I've already read one shitty, unfair attack from you, asshole,
>> implying that I'm a "hypocrite" because I don't provide the message
>> ID's for my .sig quotes.
> 
> Case in point:  my comment about providing Message IDs was in the post
> that chrisv just literally said was “snipped, unread”.  QED..
> 
> 
>> Nothing requires me to provide message ID's, asshole.
> 
> Except for using best practices.  Keep that in mind next time to try to whine
> about someone else’s (usually Microsoft for you) “Kwality”
> 
> Oh, and your personal credibility takes a hit whenever you can’t substantiate after a call for a cite.
> 
> 
>> I provide actual quotes, not made-up shit.  Unlike your lying ilk, asshole.
> 
> Unsubstantiated claim; cite please.  Now if only chrisv had had a URL link to make that citation...!
> 
>> The "absolutionist claims which brook no compromise" that I have
>> noticed are from shitty trolls, twisting ...
> 
> Oh, so then you’re confessing to being one of said “shitty trolls”!  Good for you!
> 
>> I'm sure that there have been, among the thousands of advocates posts,
>> some carelessly-worded statements, and even some unreasonable
>> statements.
> 
> And just how often has it been that when these have been called out that the
> resulting behavior has been anything other than admitting to a mistake?
> 
>> But no one here ever thought, or seriously claimed, that
>> LibreOffice/OpenOffice is "100% compatible" with MS-Office.  Ditto for
>> the claim that GIMP is "equal to" Photoshop.
> 
> Oh look:  chrisv has tried to move the goalposts to be that we’re the ones who
> are now being expected to prove intent, or to figure out when a claim was a normal
> one or a “serious” one.  That’s bullshit and utterly lame.
> 
>> And you know it, asshole.
> 
> The Princess - she doth yon again protesteth too much!  /s
> 
> 
> -hh
> I did not find a quote backing the LO claim (which does not imply Peter 
or others have not made that claim) but I did find examples of advocates 
claiming GIMP was not just the equal to Photoshop but better.

And chrisv refuses to speak of him doing the EXACT thing he accuses you:

   chrisv:
     -----
     That thing won't even acknowledge that virtual desktops are a very
     nice feature.  It claims that they require "too much configuration".

     You see, they require that you decide how to organize things on the
     desktops.

     In other words, in order to enjoy the benefit of a tool, you must
     actually use the tool.

     Sheesh.
     -----

No quote. No message ID. No evidence at all.

He made it up.

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451731

On Friday, May 18, 2018 at 9:49:24 AM UTC-7, Snit wrote:
> On 5/18/18 8:45 AM, -hh wrote:
> > 
> > chrisv wrote:
> >> -hh wrote:
> >>> (snipped, unread)
> > 
> > Since Chris then went on to dispute things which were said, he’s either lying,
> > or I’m living rent free in his head ;-)
> > 
> >> Nothing that I wrote can be honestly disputed.  No reason to read some
> >> asshole's lashing-out to save face.
> > 
> > He said to try to save face.  And why dispute chrisv’s claims when it’s
> > usually straightforward to just debunk them?
> > 
> >> I've already read one shitty, unfair attack from you, asshole,
> >> implying that I'm a "hypocrite" because I don't provide the message
> >> ID's for my .sig quotes.
> > 
> > Case in point:  my comment about providing Message IDs was in the post
> > that chrisv just literally said was “snipped, unread”.  QED..
> > 
> > 
> >> Nothing requires me to provide message ID's, asshole.
> > 
> > Except for using best practices.  Keep that in mind next time to try to whine
> > about someone else’s (usually Microsoft for you) “Kwality”
> > 
> > Oh, and your personal credibility takes a hit whenever you can’t substantiate after a call for a cite.
> > 
> > 
> >> I provide actual quotes, not made-up shit.  Unlike your lying ilk, asshole.
> > 
> > Unsubstantiated claim; cite please.  Now if only chrisv had had a URL link to make that citation...!
> > 
> >> The "absolutionist claims which brook no compromise" that I have
> >> noticed are from shitty trolls, twisting ...
> > 
> > Oh, so then you’re confessing to being one of said “shitty trolls”!  Good for you!
> > 
> >> I'm sure that there have been, among the thousands of advocates posts,
> >> some carelessly-worded statements, and even some unreasonable
> >> statements.
> > 
> > And just how often has it been that when these have been called out that the
> > resulting behavior has been anything other than admitting to a mistake?
> > 
> >> But no one here ever thought, or seriously claimed, that
> >> LibreOffice/OpenOffice is "100% compatible" with MS-Office.  Ditto for
> >> the claim that GIMP is "equal to" Photoshop.
> > 
> > Oh look:  chrisv has tried to move the goalposts to be that we’re the ones who
> > are now being expected to prove intent, or to figure out when a claim was a normal
> > one or a “serious” one.  That’s bullshit and utterly lame.
> > 
> >> And you know it, asshole.
> > 
> > The Princess - she doth yon again protesteth too much!  /s
> > 
> > 
> > -hh
> > I did not find a quote backing the LO claim (which does not imply Peter 
> or others have not made that claim) but I did find examples of advocates 
> claiming GIMP was not just the equal to Photoshop but better.
> 
> And chrisv refuses to speak of him doing the EXACT thing he accuses you:
> 
>    chrisv:
>      -----
>      That thing won't even acknowledge that virtual desktops are a very
>      nice feature.  It claims that they require "too much configuration".
> 
>      You see, they require that you decide how to organize things on the
>      desktops.
> 
>      In other words, in order to enjoy the benefit of a tool, you must
>      actually use the tool.
> 
>      Sheesh.
>      -----
> 
> No quote. No message ID. No evidence at all.
> 
> He made it up.
> 
> -- 
> Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
> cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
> somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
> 
> They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
> 
> <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>



You're clueless! This forum is a septic tank. What do you get out of lying, The Holy Ghost? 

Don't get too confident, The Holy Ghost, sometimes "advocates" are just that. 

The Holy Ghost asked to be rated according to provable trolling measurements, which Zeus accommodated. 

-- 
This Trick Gets Women Hot For You!!
http://www.5z8.info/backyard-fireworks-disasters_t7w7pu_bombbuilding
http://prescottcomputerguy.com/screenflow
Jonas Eklundh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451691

On 5/18/18 7:23 AM, chrisv wrote:
> -hh wrote:
> 
>> (snipped, unread)
> 
> Nothing that I wrote can be honestly disputed.  No reason to read some
> asshole's lashing-out to save face.
> 
> I've already read one shitty, unfair attack from you, asshole,
> implying that I'm a "hypocrite" because I don't provide the message
> ID's for my .sig quotes.
> 
> Nothing requires me to provide message ID's, asshole.  I provide
> actual quotes, not made-up shit.  Unlike your lying ilk, asshole.

Well, there is this, from just the other day, when you provided "made-up 
shit":

   chrisv:
     -----
     That thing won't even acknowledge that virtual desktops are a very
     nice feature.  It claims that they require "too much configuration".

     You see, they require that you decide how to organize things on the
     desktops.

     In other words, in order to enjoy the benefit of a tool, you must
     actually use the tool.

     Sheesh.
     -----

I have repeatedly asked you about it. You refuse to speak of it.

> The "absolutionist claims which brook no compromise" that I have
> noticed are from shitty trolls, twisting what the advocates have said,
> to attack them as "unreasonable" or whatever.

That is EXACTLY what you did to me.

> I'm sure that there have been, among the thousands of advocates posts,
> some carelessly-worded statements, and even some unreasonable
> statements.

Such as the one of yours I keep quoting and you refuse to talk about.

> But no one here ever thought, or seriously claimed, that
> LibreOffice/OpenOffice is "100% compatible" with MS-Office.  Ditto for
> the claim that GIMP is "equal to" Photoshop.

   7:
     -----
     > * Photoshop
     Gimp better
     -----

   JEDIDIAH:
     -----
     The last time I did something more interesting with gimp, the
     procedure was pretty much identical to it's Photoshop counterpart to
     the point where you could use Photshop docs and apply them to gimp.
     In that case, it didn't really matter which of the two products I
     was using. The procedure was the same. The only different really is
     not being $600 out of pocket.
     -----

> And you know it, asshole.

Just as you know your claim, quoted above, is nonsense.


-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy

csiph-web