***BOGO*** Re: ot: Re: Back/forward buttons

[squaredancer <squaredancer@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 01.07.2008 14:44, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Jay Garcia to 
generate the following:? :
> On 30.06.2008 23:40, ????? wrote:
>
>  --- Original Message ---
>
>   
>> On Jun 30, 9:37 pm, Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
>> <peter.potamus.the.purple.hi...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>     
>>> ????? wrote:
>>>       
>>>>  Just saying "you cannot" is not helpful and
>>>> at this point not appreciated. If you do not know, do not push your
>>>> ignorance upon the rest of us.
>>>>         
>>> you know, the best way NOT to get help is to continue with
>>> that pompous attitude.
>>>
>>> followup set to mozilla.general
>>>
>>> --
>>> *IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email
>>> help!!!! Emails to me may become public
>>>
>>> Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech
>>> Laws, which applies everywhere in the FREE world, except for
>>> some strange reason, not to the mozilla.org newsgroup
>>> servers, where your posting may get you banned.
>>>
>>> Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
>>>       
>
>   
>> It is not pompous. There is for example the customButtons extension
>> and someone has written a buggy but sort of working back button code.
>> I have modified it to go forward. So both buttons are demonstrably
>> possible. It is just that this particular effort is not yet polished
>> enough. And this "champion" is telling me it cannot be done. How am I
>> supposed to react to that? I tried to politely tell him that his
>> negativity is plain wrong and may detract someone from posting a real
>> solution so I politely asked him to stop responding. I tried to and
>> still am trying to be civil and courteous but yes, I do not like
>> incompetence and I let him know it.
>>     
>
>
> First of all, you completely ignore the request to bottom post, so how
> are we to give any credence to anything you post/reply, etc.?
>
> I still say it doesn't work insofar as any built-in customization, etc.
> If there is an extension that DOES work and is not buggy, then please
> provide the link. It is not our intentions to post links to buggy
> software and/or add-ons that are not "polished" and ready to use by all
> users, especially those that are considered "newbies". That's what
> "champions" do, they support all users with software that's been tested
> and ready to use. We also provide support to the more advanced user by
> either posting or providing links to alpha/beta software/addons, etc.
> and sometimes raw code for use by advanced users.
>
> What you are telling everyone is that you found an addon or code that is
> not finished or polished (as you put it) and is buggy. Post a link to
> this addon so we can have a look and "maybe" someone here can take it a
> step further, who knows.
>
>   

I won't take that up, Jay, as I am incompetence in person!
Seems strange though, that people who seem to have "suitable programming 
skills" wouldn't take the challenge, and re-write the base code.... or 
hack the chrome.js.....  must be easy for a user who can edit and 
compile source code???
But then again - if that person can't even search the themes and 
extensions website.........

reg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general