NASB in Paragraph Format
Comments
-
Before the Full Format looked like this:
1 Now the man had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain, and she said, “I have gotten a manchild with the help of the Lord.”
Now it looks like this:
1 Now the man had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain, and she said, “I have gotten a manchild with the help of the Lord.”
How do you I get the original back in Copy Bible Verses?
0 -
It didn't come through right. What I was trying to show is that the text alignment is separate from the verse number. Like in list format:
- Now the man had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain, and she said, “I have gotten a manchild with the help of the Lord.”
- Again, she gave birth to his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of flocks, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.
0 -
It didn't come through right. What I was trying to show is that the text alignment is separate from the verse number. Like in list format:
Understood - thanks for the clarification
I don't think there is any way we - as users - can change this. Others previously in this thread have requested that the behaviour in the CBV tool reverts to how it was but I haven't seen anything definitive from Faithlife regarding this.
0 -
Thanks for the replies...
Disclaimer: I really do have a life [:D] and do not hold the issue of the formatted appearance of the NASB95 in my Bible software as a determining factor for the quality of my life or eternal existence (smile again).
Having said that...the visual filter work-around does not provide the same appearance as the original (the pericopes and paragraphs are shoved together, etc.), unless that has been changed in the last day or two.
In the end I would guess my preference has to do with some mild level of eidetic reference for me. This after 20 years of usage and notes...highlighting...bold text. You know, sort of like the visual/mental references for those of us who are old enough to have highlighted/notated paper Bibles until they were worn out.
AND...I have had no thought whatsoever that this was some "money grab" ruse on the part of FL.
Still, I would be glad to pay for the resource in the old format if it were made available.
Thanks guys...0 -
-
I use NASB95 for many reasons, one of which is the line-per-verse presentation. And while some may have this attitude...
Still, I would be glad to pay for the resource in the old format if it were made available....I am not so accommodating. I'm not going to pay for this resource again. You see, I actually PAID $$ for NASB95 back in the 90s, before it was added to the base packages. It wasn't cheap, either. I'm NOT going to pay for it again. Not only that, but I fully expect FL to restore my NASB95 back to its original condition very soon, and they can then go back to figuring out how to offer a paragraph format for those who want that. I have no interest in such a thing. I personally feel ROBBED and at this point I'm just biding a short window of time before I start gathering names of similarly aggrieved parties.
RESTORE IT EXACTLY AS BEFORE ASAP.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
I use NASB95 for many reasons, one of which is the line-per-verse presentation. And while some may have this attitude...
Still, I would be glad to pay for the resource in the old format if it were made available....I am not so accommodating. I'm not going to pay for this resource again. You see, I actually PAID $$ for NASB95 back in the 90s, before it was added to the base packages. It wasn't cheap, either. I'm NOT going to pay for it again. Not only that, but I fully expect FL to restore my NASB95 back to its original condition very soon, and they can then go back to figuring out how to offer a paragraph format for those who want that. I have no interest in such a thing. I personally feel ROBBED and at this point I'm just biding a short window of time before I start gathering names of similarly aggrieved parties.
RESTORE IT EXACTLY AS BEFORE ASAP.
Agree. And if anyone has to pay let it be those who want the new paragraph format.
Also, what happens to all our notes and highlights if we have to buy a new resource?
And I guess FL/logos has no intention of answering the YES or NO question posted earlier. Getting more like Zondervan all the time!
Longtime Logos user (more than $30,000 in purchases) - now a second class user because I won't pay them more every month or year.
0 -
I can't imagine that they would produce a separate resource. That's totally unnecessary and would bring on even more problems.
I agree that FL made a few mistakes: a) releasing without better testing, and b) by not ensuring that line-by-line was the default.
And I know it's the accumulation of similar goofs over the years that makes it worse.
But, Mistake made, it's now more helpful to focus on the FIX. They are continuing to make changes and updates to correct it. That tells us they do not intend to release a separate resource. Nor should they! They are perfectly capable of making this work as a single resource. With all the same formatting and functionality. The best way to move this forward is to take Mark's example and post bug reports for every difference that needs to be fixed.
0 -
And I guess FL/logos has no intention of answering the YES or NO question posted earlier. Getting more like Zondervan all the time!
FL leadership refusing to answer your question is the equivalent of the somebody making a rude gesture. Regardless of the answer they should at least have the decency to answer your question Alex.
0 -
FL leadership refusing to answer your question is the equivalent of the somebody making a rude gesture.
Don't be daft. Failing to answer one forum post directly (out of a ton) while actively working on addressing the issue raised in broad terms and regularly communicating their progress/intent is hardly the same as a rude gesture. It just isn't.
Loads of people campaigned for Faithlife to update the resource to paragraph formatting, and they did so. They realised that people weren't happy with the visual filter to display verses on new lines, so they've released multiple updates in a short span of time to improve the behaviour and confirmed that they're still working on it now.
0 -
Don't be daft.
James you make a lot of valuable contributions to these forums with your questions about FL's products and your sharing of your experiences and learnings about the products. This is not one of your finest moments.
You have allowed yourself to fall into the trap of attacking a fellow customer because you don't share their experience of the company or view on this particular issue. These forums are for all customers to provide feedback, whether it be positive or negative, in regards to their experiences with the company and it's products.
A customer focused company wants to know what both engages and disengages their customers and will respond to both of these scenarios. Customers who are disengaged by the actions of FL on this issue feel their concerns and in particular a direct question on the topic are not being answered adequately.
You do not have a right to tell disengaged customers their feedback is not welcome because you consider it 'daft'. And sadly it has not been you alone. There have been others from the paragraph format camp who think the appropriate way to deal with this divide is to attack the person instead of simply sticking to sharing their views and experiences. On the other hand I can't recall one person who prefers the original format launch an attack against the person of someone of the opposing view. We have simply stuck to highlighting the fact we are not happy with the way FL has handle this and are not happy they are not answering direct questions that have been raised.
They realised that people weren't happy with the visual filter to display verses on new lines, so they've released multiple updates in a short span of time to improve the behaviour and confirmed that they're still working on it now.
If you were being balanced and fair James you would recognise like Randy that FL has made a few mistakes in the handling of this issue and its FL's lack of openness in admitting the same re-enforces my view they are being rude towards a segment of their customers.
I agree that FL made a few mistakes: a) releasing without better testing, and b) by not ensuring that line-by-line was the default.
And I know it's the accumulation of similar goofs over the years that makes it worse.
FL over the years have not learnt from their 'similar goofs'. They get an idea in their head, don't fully think through all the issues and impacts upon customers and run with the idea prematurely and then afterwards expect customers to sit back and accept the mess they create while they fix it up after the action has been thrust upon customers.
James I have read all of the posts on this topic, I am well aware of this fact and if you have read everything you would see that I have at one point made acknowledgement of their efforts. My concern is not with efforts of those who are trying to improve the visual filter. I recognise this is probably taking them away from other things they might have been otherwise focusing on improving and they are doing their best in a short time frame to get updates out. The problem you are missing because you have decided others are not allowed to share a view point different to yours is that the leadership of FL are not answering directly how they are going to give back to those who had taken away from them something they paid for and never asked to be changed because it was not broken. Whether you agree or not the behavior of the leadership of FL towards customers seeking answers to these questions is rude.
0 -
Don't be daft.
James you make a lot of valuable contributions to these forums with your questions about FL's products and your sharing of your experiences and learnings about the products. This is not one of your finest moments.
You have allowed yourself to fall into the trap of attacking a fellow customer because you don't share their experience of the company or view on this particular issue. These forums are for all customers to provide feedback, whether it be positive or negative, in regards to their experiences with the company and it's products.
A customer focused company wants to know what both engages and disengages their customers and will respond to both of these scenarios. Customers who are disengaged by the actions of FL on this issue feel their concerns and in particular a direct question on the topic are not being answered adequately.
You do not have a right to tell disengaged customers their feedback is not welcome because you consider it 'daft'. And sadly it has not been you alone. There have been others from the paragraph format camp who think the appropriate way to deal with this divide is to attack the person instead of simply sticking to sharing their views and experiences. On the other hand I can't recall one person who prefers the original format launch an attack against the person of someone of the opposing view. We have simply stuck to highlighting the fact we are not happy with the way FL has handle this and are not happy they are not answering direct questions that have been raised.
They realised that people weren't happy with the visual filter to display verses on new lines, so they've released multiple updates in a short span of time to improve the behaviour and confirmed that they're still working on it now.
If you were being balanced and fair James you would recognise like Randy that FL has made a few mistakes in the handling of this issue and its FL's lack of openness in admitting the same re-enforces my view they are being rude towards a segment of their customers.
I agree that FL made a few mistakes: a) releasing without better testing, and b) by not ensuring that line-by-line was the default.
And I know it's the accumulation of similar goofs over the years that makes it worse.
FL over the years have not learnt from their 'similar goofs'. They get an idea in their head, don't fully think through all the issues and impacts upon customers and run with the idea prematurely and then afterwards expect customers to sit back and accept the mess they create while they fix it up after the action has been thrust upon customers.
James I have read all of the posts on this topic, I am well aware of this fact and if you have read everything you would see that I have at one point made acknowledgement of their efforts. My concern is not with efforts of those who are trying to improve the visual filter. I recognise this is probably taking them away from other things they might have been otherwise focusing on improving and they are doing their best in a short time frame to get updates out. The problem you are missing because you have decided others are not allowed to share a view point different to yours is that the leadership of FL are not answering directly how they are going to give back to those who had taken away from them something they paid for and never asked to be changed because it was not broken. Whether you agree or not the behavior of the leadership of FL towards customers seeking answers to these questions is rude.
Longtime Logos user (more than $30,000 in purchases) - now a second class user because I won't pay them more every month or year.
0 -
You have allowed yourself to fall into the trap of attacking a fellow customer because you don't share their experience of the company or view on this particular issue.
I haven’t attacked anyone. I told someone not to be daft. That’s not an attack. Faithlife answered the request of a ton of people by providing paragraph formatting. In doing so, they failed to see how it might offend those who prefered the old formatting. Since discovering that, they’ve acted to fix it. They’ve been advised that their fixes still fall short, so they’ve said they’re working on it.
It was suggested that they stop working on it and revert back to the old file, and they haven’t responded to that very specific request yet. Arguably not ideal. But I think equating that shortcoming with a rude gesture is daft. It’s not. They’re clearly working on the issue, they clearly care about what’s being said.
the solution being suggested means that everyone would have to have two seperate resources for the same text (though the suggestion has tended to be framed in such a way that the people who prefer paragraph formatting should be dismissed altogether). That might be the best solution for some, but it’s not the best solution for others. I think they could acknowldege the option (though I don’t think they’re obligated to do so immediately), and possibly even agree to it. But given that other customers/needs exist and their resources are finite, a bit of a delay is not a rude gesture. It’s not obvious that it’s a gesture of any kind.
0 -
I would not like it if they revert back to line format- I find no shortcomings with how I use the paragraph format.
0 -
I prefer the paragraph format as well. The original NASB 1977 was in paragraph format originally, When the 1995 revision came out it got changed to verse format.
0 -
I would not like it if they revert back to line format-
Tough, but they don't have much choice. They face legal action if they don't return what they've stolen.
Taking from Peter to pay Paul is never a good option.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
I would not like it if they revert back to line format-
Tough, but they don't have much choice. They face legal action if they don't return what they've stolen.
Taking from Peter to pay Paul is never a good option.
What an asinine comment to make- go ahead and sue.
0 -
Say whatever you want. There's ONE Bible that has line-per-verse formatting, and rather than be content with ALL BUT ONE, folks like you want ALL. This whole scenario reminds me of 2 Sam. 12:1-5. In this dispute, there's a safe side to be on, and there's a side that reaps whirlwind. If I wasn't using L3 right now, I would be dead in the water. My 20 years investment in Logos--and I'm talking about my time investment in terms of making thousands of notes rather than the $35K+ financial hook--would be essentially obliterated. MY LIFE IS IN THOSE NOTES and they are enmeshed in my copy of NASB95. I'm not going to let that disappear without a fight. So, yeah, if it's necessary, I'll gather all of those who feel the same way and will do whatever it takes to stay alive--because that's what this is for me.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
David,
I may be mistaken but I would like to believe your notes will be fine in the paragraph version. You may want try that out on a test system. By the way the new notes version my be more to your liking than the current version we now have. Then you could migrate "Libby" to the newest version of notes.
0 -
Hmmm ... 1 Cor 6:1-7? [*-)]
Instead of Artificial Intelligence, I prefer to continue to rely on Divine Intelligence instructing my Natural Dullness (Ps 32:8, John 16:13a)
0 -
Tough, but they don't have much choice. They face legal action if they don't return what they've stolen.
I'm not a lawyer, but I think if we check our agreement with FL, we'd see that the copyright owner owns the content, not FL or us. What we own is a license which unlocks and lets us access the NASB. (No one has stolen our NASB license.)
Unlike a physical book (which we can own), we don't own the digital NASB itself -- the content -- and we probably don't own the format, style, or appearance of that content, either.
While a change in format has angered some customers, if anyone has any legal basis here, it's probably the copyright holder, not us.
Thanks to FL for including Carta and a Hebrew audio bible in Logos 9!
0 -
.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
In order to shake the mess that has been created into a sloppy order that only mildly resembles the product that was purchased, FL's attempt to achieve the marginal effect of returning to a line-per-verse format requires TURNING OFF NOTES. The line-per-verse format, in a badly butchered state, is achieved by turning off visual filters and running Bible Text Only. That eviscerates the entire reason I desire the line-per-verse format. This is NO SOLUTION AT ALL AND IS NOT WHAT I PURCHASED AND HAVE NEARLY A TWO DECADE HISTORY OF EXPECTING.
I appreciate that you might still want changes made, but you certainly can still view notes with the "one verse per line" setting enabled:
0 -
You have allowed yourself to fall into the trap of attacking a fellow customer because you don't share their experience of the company or view on this particular issue.
I haven’t attacked anyone. I told someone not to be daft.
James if you want to continue to tell yourself you have a right to call people daft because they have a different view to you on an issue and then I will pray for you.
James you are not part of the leadership of FL, you do not represent them in any way yet to presume your answers should be satisfactory for those who have asked for the leadership of FL to speak. I am sorry but it does not work that way, you are just a customer who seems to think speaking rudely to other customers is ok and should result in them going away. James all you are doing is fanning them flames when you continue to directly attack other people's viewpoints instead of sticking to expressing your own views.
So no matter how much you want to deny it and try and cloud thes issue with your personal judgements on what other people have said, or continue to not read everything I have said and try and tell me again what I have already acknowledged, you have done nothing to convince me that FL has answered all questions and their decision to continue to not answer all of those questions is rude.
0 -
James visual filters do not work in compatabilty mode on the web app - another issue FL have failed to acknowledge and answer if that will always be the case or if it will be fixed in a future date. In the mean time someone who wants access to verse per line view in that context is locked out of it. Visual filters are not a solution in all circumstances and if you have bothered to read all comments about this issue you would understand visual filters do not give the same display format that was originally available before FL botched this whole thing up and they still have not answered whether they intended to get the visual filters to return the original display format.
0 -
DOC, I'm never pretended to speak for Faithlife - I'm making a similar point to yours on appropriate language - accusing Faithlife of being abusive. I don't know if "daft" means something different in the states (not actually sure if that's where you're from, but judging by your replies I suspect something's been lost in translation), but in the UK it's a mild term to describe someone being "a bit silly" - which that particular accusation obviously is. I've never said people should be happy with my words on the matter - I'm really not pushing any view on what people should be happy with. All I'm doing is saying that a company actively working to resolve the concerns of a few users (albeit not in the way or the speed you would like) is not abusive. That's all I'm saying. If you read the way that Faithlife have responded as abuse, you have misread the situation by any reasonable measure.
You can complain, ask for a fix, say the issue hasn't been resolved, ask for updates, ask for better responses and say they've let you down - that's all fine. But they have not abused anyone here. I won't call it daft, if the word upsets you, but it's terribly silly.
0 -
James you keep digging yourself deeper, you continue to state you think it is appropriate for you to judge other people because they have a different view to yours - calling people silly or daft or whatever way you want to rephrase it is not appropriate way to speak to another person - and using the secular culture to justify speaking to a person in that manner does not make it right. It remains inappropriate and a personal attack upon me as a person.
And now you are saying I have said FL are being abusive. I have never said they have acted abusively or done anything that can be classed as abuse. I said their refusal to answer questions is rude. Nothing more, nothng less.
DOC, I'm never pretended to speak for Faithlife - I'm making a similar point to yours on appropriate language - accusing Faithlife of being abusive. I don't know if "daft" means something different in the states (not actually sure if that's where you're from, but judging by your replies I suspect something's been lost in translation), but in the UK it's a mild term to describe someone being "a bit silly" - which that particular accusation obviously is. I've never said people should be happy with my words on the matter - I'm really not pushing any view on what people should be happy with. All I'm doing is saying that a company actively working to resolve the concerns of a few users (albeit not in the way or the speed you would like) is not abusive. That's all I'm saying. If you read the way that Faithlife have responded as abuse, you have misread the situation by any reasonable measure.
You can complain, ask for a fix, say the issue hasn't been resolved, ask for updates, ask for better responses and say they've let you down - that's all fine. But they have not abused anyone here. I won't call it daft, if the word upsets you, but it's terribly silly.
0 -
You didn’t just say it was rude in a generic way, you said it was equivalent to a rude gesture.
Not answering the phone might be rude, but it’s passive. Rude gestures are active - they’re deliberate acts designed to cause offence, thus abusive. Hence it’s not a suitable comparison for what’s happening with Faithlife, and it’s silly to use that kind of language.
i’m really not making a contentious point here. Rude gestures are abusive. Abuse hasn’t happened. Failures can be discussed using less loaded language.
Don’t keep turning that obvious point into an attack on you or anyone else. Corrections are not attacks. It’s part of discipleship. Anyway, I think it‘s wise if I leave the convo.
0 -
I agree. There are many forums, thousands of posts, and it's not like they have a full time staff whose job it is to be devoted to responding to every post by every individual. Saying not responding to a post is the the equivalent to a rude gesture is, in my opinion, going to far. They are, as far as we know, working on a solution. At this point, I'm guessing they didn't see the post or they feel responding to it will not be productive at this time.
Faithlife has been quick on fixing things and slow at fixing things. They were quick, once the ball was rolling with the publisher, in making the NASB into a paragraph format. However, the visual filter, since it is part of the core system of Logos 7, may be a little trickier to reprogram and format, as it would be affecting numerous books and how they look.
Corrections are not attacks. It’s part of discipleship.
James, I don't know if you'll get a notification to my post, but, if you do, I agree with you wholeheartedly here. Correction is a part of discipleship that I think many pass over because they don't want to offend or upset people.
Pastor, Mt. Leonard Baptist Church, SBC
0 -
You didn’t just say it was rude in a generic way, you said it was equivalent to a rude gesture.
Not answering the phone might be rude, but it’s passive. Rude gestures are active - they’re deliberate acts designed to cause offence, thus abusive. Hence it’s not a suitable comparison for what’s happening with Faithlife, and it’s silly to use that kind of language.
i’m really not making a contentious point here. Rude gestures are abusive. Abuse hasn’t happened. Failures can be discussed using less loaded language.
Don’t keep turning that obvious point into an attack on you or anyone else.
James
1) you call me daft and silly because I have a different view to you and are unwilling to accept that your choice of words towards me was inappropriate
2) you make false accusations claiming I said FL was abusive when I have never done so
3) you don't know me at all and yet after doing the above you presume you can speak into my life and correct me for something I haven't done
4) you try to justify all of this to yourself so you do not have to admit your wrong dong by calling it 'discipleship'
James how can you think after doing 1) & 2) above that you have a relationship of trust that allows you to speak into my life? Seriously how can you think that and think think that I am going to accept you speaking a lie about what I said as a correction? You just don't get it do you?
And all of this simply because you dont agree with myself or others who prefer the NASB95 in the format it was originally.
You are the one who is trying to turn attention away from what those who prefer the original one verse per line format.
Anyway, I think it‘s wise if I leave the convo.
It is a pity you did not show such wisdom before using derogatory terms about me, and then before making false accusations, and then before trying to take a false moral high ground claiming you have earnt a position of trust in my life and can presume to correct me all in order to continue to avoid admitting your initial wrong doing.
0
