Wanye Mery’s comment:
“You make several references to decades old bugs with not a single link to a bug report. And a reference to "I wasted my time trying to do a bug rep… (read more)
Wanye Mery’s comment:
“You make several references to decades old bugs with not a single link to a bug report. And a reference to "I wasted my time trying to do a bug report to bugzilla which accepted my account, put me through a verification process, then wouldn't allow me to use it." which has nothing to do with Thunderbird, and I'm pretty sure has a contact address for resolving problems. And lastly, many detours unrelated to problem solving.
In short, this topic is going nowhere fast. Therefore I am locking it.
I am sure you have a problem. If you want help resolving your problem, please be respectful of people's time and post details about your problem and only that problem, as breifly has possible, and also please provide information requested of you.
To quote the submission form you used to request assistance, "Be nice. Our volunteers are Mozilla users just like you, who take the time out of their day to help."
Wayne Mery let me take time out of my day to explain where your comment failed:
I have been contacted by 3 “experts” now and two things are clear:
1. You’re more focused on defending the product and yourselves than fixing bugs.
2. Not only is it that you can’t fix the bug I presented you aren’t even going to try and it will remain a bug ad infinitum.
Your comment:
First: “bug” not “bugs”
Second: If it was possible to reference a previous bug report, there would be no point in reporting it, would there? So it’s mind numbingly obvious I’m commenting because there is no previous bug report. And my comments spelled that out clearly.
Third: I also made it clear someone had asked the question before, I didn’t however say to this site. Nor did I say they had reported it I merely said that it had been a bug for a decade.
Don’t use Bugzilla? And yet my search of Mozilla recommended a bug report could be filed via Bugzilla in reference to contribution to improving the product. Maybe you should look it up before commenting.
You are “pretty sure Thunderbird has a contact address” and you’ll quote that as if it meant something even though you don’t know?
Tell me, your Thunderbird programme fails, what do you suppose anyone with a computer on earth would type into their web browser first? Save you the suspense: “Thunderbird help”. Why do you suppose I’m not on Thunderbird help?
“many detours unrelated to problem solving”
A suggestion for you for the future: Make sure you only use volunteers interested resolving problems, who aren’t easily hurt by comments and don’t make stuff up to defend the product. Resolute focus on the actual issues and ignoring what is superfluous to those issues is the fundamental requirement of excellence in problem solving.
Not sure? Let me give you an example, use my first comment:
Observed in the comment:
1. Thunderbird not working and what the problem is.
2. This person is annoyed, why? He’s made a simple standard change to Thunderbird, the programme failed so he can’t use it. He has discovered it has been an ongoing failure for about a decade.
First address the superfluous: Does he have a right to be annoyed? Yes. Ignore and move onto what’s important.
Next: My options for problem solving:
Option 1. Can I resolve it with the information available: Yes: Do it. No: got to 2.
Option 2. Ask for more information and try to solve.
Option 3. Get hurt and upset, try to use sarcasm to defend the product and ignore the actual issue.
People who go for Option 3 shouldn’t be wasting their time, the questioners time or anyone else’s time responding to questions. For example Stans had 2 options: 1. Ignore the comment or 2. Start a battle of who’s the most sarcastic. I’ll leave it to you to figure out what’s best for your site: Industry best practice or Stans approach.
Clearly the most disrespectful waste of time was when Stans started by announcing the product was perfect and then compounded that by making a range of incongruous statements: “the product is faultless”, “I can fix the fault”, “the bug has been deliberately ignored”, “I don’t know if the bug has been reported”. Do you seriously contend that doesn’t waste my time? It is also disrespectful when an outsider advises you of a bug and the first comment made is there is no problem with the programme followed by unsustainable excuses as to why there is.
“Please provide the information requested of you.” Really? Feel free to tell me what was requested of me and was not fully answered. Stans asked me for nothing and got nothing, Mat asked for something and got a complete response.
The fact was, once again mind numbingly obvious, I was nice to your volunteers (but not the product) until your volunteer Stans started wasting my time feeding me incongruities on a subject he clearly couldn’t answer. You may not be able to follow this but there is a difference between being nice to volunteers and to a product. On close discussion with my monitor, Thunderbird has no feelings to hurt. If the volunteer gets hurt by negative comment on the product or a 10 year failure to fix it, perhaps they shouldn’t be volunteering irrelevancies.
But hey you’ve chosen to lock the comment and leave the bug unresolved for another decade….. Way to go on the sites dedication to problem solving.
p.s. New rule: You may like to advise your volunteers that it’s not a debate forum so, if they are more interested in debating a comment than answering it: Don’t.
