8.1 (8.1.0.0016) is Now Available
Comments
-
SineNomine said:
In my own life, products I don't like, I don't buy for myself, especially when there are alternatives that I prefer.
*goes back to enjoying Verbum 8*
That's why it's important for prospective purchasers need to be aware of more than the adverts and fan excitement.
I remain impressed that Logos found time for their adverts on the home page (that they knew was an issue in earlier attempts), but not the switch to turn them off. I remain a happy 7 user until they learn a bit of honesty.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Denise said:
I remain a happy 7 user until they learn a bit of honesty.
And how exactly were they dishonest? That is a pretty big accusation.
0 -
David Taylor Jr said:Graham Owen said:
To be 100% clear I'm not arguing that Faithlife should stop working on the new stuff, I think that some of the new tools have real potential. All I'm asking for is to know what of the "missing" will be fixed, what will never be fixed and for the stuff that will be fixed when can we expect the fixes.
https://support.logos.com/hc/en-us/articles/360019191392-Changes-from-Logos-7-to-Logos-8 Though it is unreasonable to say when we can expect fixes because they probably do not know themselves. It changes as different things get prioritized. But that link talks about the differences and whether they plan to bring something back or rework it in 8. In some cases it even gives dates.
That article is the one that was eventually published after multiple user complaints about the lack of communication. Let's be clear this was not published, as it should have been, as part of the release process but was the result of the pressure applied to Faithlife by users who were experiencing issues.
I understand why Faithlife are reluctant to commit to when things will be fixed but as a long term user with a significant investment in the product I think I deserve more than:
- "We’re still exploring how best to bring these back"
- "We plan to restore this functionality in a future release"
- "We don’t currently plan to restore this behavior"
I really do not believe that asking for greater clarity is unreasonable.
0 -
Graham Owen said:David Taylor Jr said:Graham Owen said:
To be 100% clear I'm not arguing that Faithlife should stop working on the new stuff, I think that some of the new tools have real potential. All I'm asking for is to know what of the "missing" will be fixed, what will never be fixed and for the stuff that will be fixed when can we expect the fixes.
https://support.logos.com/hc/en-us/articles/360019191392-Changes-from-Logos-7-to-Logos-8 Though it is unreasonable to say when we can expect fixes because they probably do not know themselves. It changes as different things get prioritized. But that link talks about the differences and whether they plan to bring something back or rework it in 8. In some cases it even gives dates.
That article is the one that was eventually published after multiple user complaints about the lack of communication. Let's be clear this was not published, as it should have been, as part of the release process but was the result of the pressure applied to Faithlife by users who were experiencing issues.
I did not say it was published before the release and they have admitted that they should have. But you said in your post you wish they would as if they had not done so which is why I provided the link.
0 -
Graham Owen said:David Taylor Jr said:Graham Owen said:
To be 100% clear I'm not arguing that Faithlife should stop working on the new stuff, I think that some of the new tools have real potential. All I'm asking for is to know what of the "missing" will be fixed, what will never be fixed and for the stuff that will be fixed when can we expect the fixes.
https://support.logos.com/hc/en-us/articles/360019191392-Changes-from-Logos-7-to-Logos-8 Though it is unreasonable to say when we can expect fixes because they probably do not know themselves. It changes as different things get prioritized. But that link talks about the differences and whether they plan to bring something back or rework it in 8. In some cases it even gives dates.
That article is the one that was eventually published after multiple user complaints about the lack of communication. Let's be clear this was not published, as it should have been, as part of the release process but was the result of the pressure applied to Faithlife by users who were experiencing issues.
I did not say it was published before the release and they have admitted that they should have. But you said in your post you wish they would as if they had not done so which is why I provided the link.
0 -
David Taylor Jr said:Graham Owen said:David Taylor Jr said:Graham Owen said:
To be 100% clear I'm not arguing that Faithlife should stop working on the new stuff, I think that some of the new tools have real potential. All I'm asking for is to know what of the "missing" will be fixed, what will never be fixed and for the stuff that will be fixed when can we expect the fixes.
https://support.logos.com/hc/en-us/articles/360019191392-Changes-from-Logos-7-to-Logos-8 Though it is unreasonable to say when we can expect fixes because they probably do not know themselves. It changes as different things get prioritized. But that link talks about the differences and whether they plan to bring something back or rework it in 8. In some cases it even gives dates.
That article is the one that was eventually published after multiple user complaints about the lack of communication. Let's be clear this was not published, as it should have been, as part of the release process but was the result of the pressure applied to Faithlife by users who were experiencing issues.
I did not say it was published before the release and they have admitted that they should have. But you said in your post you wish they would as if they had not done so which is why I provided the link.
"All I'm asking for is to know what of the "missing" will be fixed, what will never be fixed and for the stuff that will be fixed when can we expect the fixes."
Point 3 is not addressed in the article though; "for the stuff that will be fixed when can we expect the fixes."
0 -
David Taylor Jr said:Denise said:
I remain a happy 7 user until they learn a bit of honesty.
And how exactly were they dishonest? That is a pretty big accusation.
Actually not, these days. Current research, the more conservative/religious, the more amenable to dishonesty, if a higher purpose.
But I was referring to the honesty you get used to among close family, friends and church. Versus 'careful wording'. You know the game.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Graham Owen said:
for the stuff that will be fixed when can we expect the fixes
Past experience has shown FL that there will be complaints if FL misses an expected delivery date.
If FL provided dates, I imagine that there would even be complaints about prioritization. "Why are you fixing X before Y?"
Not providing dates probably helps to minimize the amount of complaints FL would get.
Thanks to FL for including Carta and a Hebrew audio bible in Logos 9!
0 -
Those in software industry know that there is no paradise on the earth.
Gold package, and original language material and ancient text material, SIL and UBS books, discourse Hebrew OT and Greek NT. PC with Windows 11
0 -
PetahChristian said:
Past experience has shown FL that there will be complaints if FL misses an expected delivery date.
Past experience also shows that users get frustrated by Faithlife's lack of clear communications in these situations. There's a lot of past experience that Faithlife choose not to learn from or ignore.
PetahChristian said:If FL provided dates, I imagine that there would even be complaints about prioritization. "Why are you fixing X before Y?"
I think we all know that the continued development of new features is going to take priority over fixing what is missing or seen as broken so why not just be open and transparent? That's why these items are being considered while new Workflows are being promised...
PetahChristian said:Not providing dates probably helps to minimize the amount of complaints FL would get.
Sure the complaints will diminish through Faithlife's refusal to communicate but that does not resolve the issue here and the silence does not mean that the problems are resolved it just means that the frustrated, ignored, users got tired and cease to expect to be treated with respect.
0 -
Graham Owen said:
I think we all know that the continued development of new features is going to take priority over fixing what is missing or seen as broken so why not just be open and transparent? That's why these items are being considered while new Workflows are being promised...
I don't think that is fair considering some of the complaints were addressed and resolved in 8.1.
Graham Owen said:Sure the complaints will diminish through Faithlife's refusal to communicate but that does not resolve the issue here and the silence does not mean that the problems are resolved it just means that the frustrated, ignored, users got tired and cease to expect to be treated with respect.
Faithlife does more than MOST companies with regard to allowing its users to have input on its software. Hardly a sign of disrespect.
0 -
Denise said:
Versus 'careful wording'. You know the game.
Unfortunately far too often with FL there has been too many misunderstandings and marketing with seemingly misleading statements (often times correctable if you follow an asterisk). But small print and offers that can seem misleading may be well and good in the business world. I am not asking FL to be a bad business but asking it to strive for more transparency. To let your YES BE YES. I know when I purchased a verbum collection I did not pay close attention to an "asterisk" and was disappointed to know the 2 volumes i was receiving of a two volume set was 1 volume and what amounts to an introductory pamphlet. Yes had I clicked on the expansion I could have known that I was not getting the 2 volumes of the two volume set but I did not because I did not think it needed to know what two volumes I was getting. Now I am not accusing FL of intentionally be dishonest but I do think it is a bit misleading when you see something like LifeGuide Bible Studies: Complete Collection (139 vols.) (Expand) Only some resources from this collection are included (while it is clear enough if you look at it carefully if you have a window that is smaller and you can not see the only some resources tag on the far right column it is easy enough to think I am getting these 139 volumes in my package) Would it be so hard to say place it as LifeGuide Bible Studies: Complete Collection (8 of 139 vols.) (Expand). That way when you do a scroll of a massive collection you know immediately and there can be no misunderstandings. In my case it was an oddity in that the description called it a 2 volume set when in fact it was released as a multivolume collection, hence the ability to offer 2 volumes yet not give you the complete 2 volume set. I do not think FL is intending to be dishonest and indeed careful close looks you are in no way being mislead. But I also think marking may be in there trying to suggest by listing it as they do to make it appears a better value at first glance.
-dan
0 -
David Taylor Jr said:Graham Owen said:
I think we all know that the continued development of new features is going to take priority over fixing what is missing or seen as broken so why not just be open and transparent? That's why these items are being considered while new Workflows are being promised...
I don't think that is fair considering some of the complaints were addressed and resolved in 8.1.
Of course the Release Notes don't detail everything but if you read the ones for 8.1 you can tell Workflows matters a lot to Faithlife right now.
David Taylor Jr said:
Graham Owen said:Sure the complaints will diminish through Faithlife's refusal to communicate but that does not resolve the issue here and the silence does not mean that the problems are resolved it just means that the frustrated, ignored, users got tired and cease to expect to be treated with respect.
Faithlife does more than MOST companies with regard to allowing its users to have input on its software. Hardly a sign of disrespect.
Allowing input is not a sign of respect, listening to and acting on it is. There are a lot of users here who feel that their voice has not and still is not being heard.
Faithlife may tolerate dissenting voices here but over a number of years they have consistently failed to improve the way that they communicate, they cause a problem, say sorry, solve or partially solve the issue, then its back to business as usual until they cause the next problem.
The obvious question is why don't we just move on? And the answer for me is that I have too much tied up in Logos Resources and simply cannot afford to right that off and start all over again with and alternative package.
0 -
Graham Owen said:
but if you read the ones for 8.1 you can tell Workflows matters a lot to Faithlife right now.
Or one could say that completing the elements that were not finished for the initial release are their current focus - homepage, search templates, notes, and workflows are the elements I have noticed.
Graham Owen said:Allowing input is not a sign of respect, listening to and acting on it is.
I am in the position of being able to say that L8 finally has implemented all of the items I was actively promoting since L4 - not necessarily precisely as I would have done them but FL did hear and act. And in several areas there is still room for improvements. In areas I was not previously vocal about, I will become more vocal as I find additional weaknesses in Logos/Verbum.
Graham Owen said:There are a lot of users here who feel that their voice has not and still is not being heard.
This is true. But when one is not being heard, it is important to consider why you are not being heard and make changes so that one will be heard. There are suggestions that I write off as improbably for one or more of these reasons: the effort required to change the software does not justify the effort; the request is so tied to a particular way of working as to lack general user application; the request is too specific - working in one context but not across all platforms; the request for priority over xxxx fails to recognize that they require different skill sets and therefore use different staff . . .
Graham Owen said:they have consistently failed to improve the way that they communicate,
They have made progress - they still have a ways to go.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
Or one could say that completing the elements that were not finished for the initial release are their current focus - homepage, search templates, notes, and workflows are the elements I have noticed.
Fair point and an equally valid interpretation of the Release Notes.
MJ. Smith said:I am in the position of being able to say that L8 finally has implemented all of the items I was actively promoting since L4
Good to know that your efforts have paid off.
MJ. Smith said:it is important to consider why you are not being heard and make changes so that one will be heard
Or give up and go back to being an occasional visitor here.
MJ. Smith said:the request for priority over xxxx fails to recognize that they require different skill sets and therefore use different staff
I get that, and that is why better communications is required, there are a multiple good reasons why Faithlife have made the choices that they did for 8 and why it will take time for them to address issues that have been raised. Skills is one, architectural choices will be another. I work as a Product Manager in the software industry so I understand the constraints but at the same time I know what the options are for managing these conflicts and high on the list is customer communications.
MJ. Smith said:They have made progress - they still have a ways to go.
As someone who in recent years is an occasional visitor here, rather than being the regular I once was, I am struggling to see the progress in communications, I have likened this release to that of 4 and for me that's how it has felt.
I have little doubt that by Logos 8.6 or 8.7 things will be fine but personally I still maintain that in its released state and with the lack of documentation on missing features Logos 8 should not have been auto installed in the same way that previous releases were under the connect subscription and that more of the "known issues" should have been communicated to established users, in addition to the email about Notes, so an informed decision could have been made.
At GA 8 was fine for new users and for those who wanted to be early adopters but for others it has proved unreasonably disruptive.
Fortunately for me I have enough experience with Logos to find workarounds for the issues that I have hit but I really do understand the concerns of those users who, for example, had become dependent on the Home Page as the easy entry point for Bible Study.
I do hope that Faithlife improve their communications especially for the next few scheduled updates, I honestly think that the long term users deserve this.
0 -
I favored Logos 7 home page because I had complete control over it. That control has been taken away and that is where the problem lies. And while we wait on them to return the complete control to us people will complain. It's been the same every release. And I imagine it will be the same in Logos 9. And 10.
0 -
Matt Hamrick said:
I favored Logos 7 home page because I had complete control over it. That control has been taken away and that is where the problem lies. And while we wait on them to return the complete control to us people will complain. It's been the same every release. And I imagine it will be the same in Logos 9. And 10.
How did you have more control over the homepage in 7 then what we have in 8.1?
0 -
There were ads in the new home page including for foreign drugs. I do realize FL considers the software free but there is no way I want outside advertising within the application.
-dan
0 -
Dan Francis said:
There were ads in the new home page including for foreign drugs. I do realize FL considers the software free but there is no way I want outside advertising within the application.
-dan
I have never seen any ads for anything other than FL related products. It comes from specific feeds on Faithlife. So there is no way a foreign drug was on there.
0 -
David Taylor Jr said:
So there is no way a foreign drug was on there.
Wrong: https://community.logos.com/forums/t/175999.aspx. I didn't really care that much about the home page but was quite upset to see the home page being fed from the site without filtration or moderation.
You really don't have to be so quick to defend FL from every criticism. Quite a few of them are deserved, and I think they can handle it anyway.
0 -
Sean said:David Taylor Jr said:
So there is no way a foreign drug was on there.
Wrong: https://community.logos.com/forums/t/175999.aspx. I didn't really care that much about the home page but was quite upset to see the home page being fed from the site without filtration or moderation.
Fair enough, but it sounds like it was an exceptional attack and they resolved it quickly.
Sean said:You really don't have to be so quick to defend FL from every criticism. Quite a few of them are deserved, and I think they can handle it anyway.
I don't. In fact, sometimes I criticize FL. However, some of the attacks on FL have been OUTRAGEOUS and ridiculous.
0 -
David Taylor Jr said:Dan Francis said:
There were ads in the new home page including for foreign drugs. I do realize FL considers the software free but there is no way I want outside advertising within the application.
-dan
I have never seen any ads for anything other than FL related products. It comes from specific feeds on Faithlife. So there is no way a foreign drug was on there.
https://community.logos.com/forums/p/175998/1016473.aspx#1016473
Although admitedly it it was a hack and not by design but in inability to customize it meant there was no way to eliminate it.
-dan
0 -
Dan Francis said:
https://community.logos.com/forums/p/175998/1016473.aspx#1016473
Although admitedly it it was a hack and not by design but in inability to customize it meant there was no way to eliminate it.
-dan
Glad we can customize it now [:)][Y]
0 -
Mark Barnes said:doc said:Mark Barnes said:
I don’t think L8 was rushed. But it was time-limited. It was the best that could be done in a limited time period. Given that 8.1 is already out, and 8.2 won’t be far behind, I think ”best in the time available“ is OK.
Rushed or time limited it was not ready for release. FL once again bit off more than they could chew and have turned out their worst home page.
Doc, I appreciate your contributions here, and I trust the following comments will be taken in good spirit. You’re free to disagree, of course!
I don’t have a problem with you being critical of Faithlife or aspects of the software. That’s partly what the forums are for. But if you’re wondering why some people overreact to your posts, this post is a good example of why that happens. If you read again what you’ve said in reply to me, you‘ll see you’ve stated in absolute terms what is, in fact, your opinion. “It was not ready for release” is your opinion. You’re quite entitled to that opinion, but if you state it as definitively as that, you shouldn’t be surprised if people express strong disagreement (as, in their opinion, it isn’t true). You might therefore find it more constructive to say, “I don’t think it was ready for release“, or “it doesn‘t seem ready for release”. The same is true for “worst home page”. Again, that’s your opinion. It’s not unreasonable, and you‘re obviously entitled to hold and express that view. But, it’s stated as though it’s an incontrovertible fact, even though it’s simply an opinion. Perhaps if you‘re able to acknowledge when you’re expressing an opinion more clearly in the future, your posts (and criticisms) may be better received.
Mark I appreciate you are commenting for the reasons because you have always tried to do you best to treat people with respect even when you disagree. That said I have no idea what you are saying, I read above and simply see an expression of my experience, frustration and disappoint with Logos 8 and how decisions made by FL come across to me based on years of this sort of thing by FL. I really don't know how I can say it any other way. I am a simple man, giving simple honest feedback. I am not sure how I could be any less definitive of my experience and remain truthful and honest. It is my experience of the product and the impact FL's decisions regarding that product have had upon me as a customer.
I have had too many people over the years try and silence me for saying anything negative about FL and I have experienced and seen to many controlling pastors in churches destroy peoples lives, I have been bullied all of my life but when I don't expect to come to forum like this and have people tell me I can't express an opinion about a product I have paid for from this company, especially when those people are no more than customers themselves.
There is much more I could say about my life experience that contribute to me being at a point in my life where I express in simple terms with honesty what I feel, but this is not the time or place and people on these forums have shown by the way the relate to me they are not the people I can trust with those things I have been through. They are part of the problem and the reason why you see what I say as being to definitive and why I can't see how I can be any less definitive. And I will not allow them to bully me through both comments on these forums and in private messages off these forums. Yesterday I went and said my goodbyes to someone close to me whom cancer is going to take very soon. People on these forums who get so upset about another customer giving definitive feedback, as you describe it Mark, about a product they both purchased have no idea of what is really important in life - a little hint to them - it's not me being honest in my opinion of a product that we both happened to purchase.
And do you know why I am express my experience honestly, forthrightly, definitively, frankly, truly or whatever other adjective people wish to attach to me or judge me with - because I believe in this company, I believe in the people behind it, I believe it will server me through my lifetime and beyond that serve man others - but it has lost it's way it's become a big business detached from it's customers and that shows through its poor level of communication with it's customers. As one simple example is I have not been receiving any emails from this company other than those related to transactions for purchases, for over 12 months. I am signed up to all the mailing lists except proclaim which have no relevance to me, faithlife.com, logos.com etc are on my email safe senders list / white list or whatever your email program calls it. Every time I deal with someone form this company about it they either don't' come back to me or I have go through the same set of standard questions, they shrug their shoulders pass it onto customer service and I never hear another word on the issue. This is the sort of response you get on a problem from a company that has become detached from it's customers and not he sort of company FL use to be under previous names.
0 -
doc said:
There is much more I could say about my life experience that contribute to me being at a point in my life where I express in simple terms with honesty what I feel
doc said:I have been bullied all of my life
doc said:Yesterday I went and said my goodbyes to someone close to me whom cancer is going to take very soon.
doc, thank you for sharing a bit of your life story. You have not said much but what you have said is significant. I'm so sorry to hear about how you have been bullied as it sounds like there is much pain behind that statement.
I have always said that "understanding someone's story provides a platform to extend grace". Unfortunately the forums don't really provide a good platform to understand someone's story. That's why I think it is a better on-line strategy to assume the best of the person who is writing knowing that I really have no idea of what has happened in their life up to that point, and especially what just happened.
Using adventure and community to challenge young people to continually say "yes" to God
0 -
doc said:
Mark I appreciate you are commenting for the reasons because you have always tried to do you best to treat people with respect even when you disagree.
Thank you.
doc said:That said I have no idea what you are saying
Sorry if I wasn't clear :-). I'll try and put it another way.
Like many pastors, I'm sometimes involved in helping couples or others settle disputes. When that happens, the people involved often see things very differently. So in a dispute, it's very useful for the people involved to acknowledge that many of the frustrations they express are from their own perspective. As a pastor, I usually encourage people to acknowledge and verbalise that what they say is from their own perspective. So if someone says, "My husband treated me like dirt!", I might encourage them to say instead, "My husband did X, and it made me feel like dirt." The same point is being made, but acknowledging it's from their perspective takes some of the heat out of the discussion, and gives something objective to discuss with the husband: "did you do X?", "can you see how X might make someone feel like dirt?".
That can happen on the forums too. Person A might like the home page because it's less cluttered than before. Person B might think the home page isn't as good as in L7, but it's still quite usable. And Person C might think the home page is terrible.
Here's the thing: none of those people are wrong, from their own perspective.
If someone doesn't acknowledge their perspective, it's very easy to get into a circular "Yes it is" / "No it's not!" argument from which there's no escape. Something like this:
- The homepage is the worst ever!
- No it's not!
- Yes it is!
- No it's not!
- You're not listening to me!
- I am listening. But you're wrong. The home page is great!
- No it's not! It doesn't do X!
- But it does A, B and C instead! Who cares about X?
On the other hand, if someone acknowledges that their criticism is from their own perspective, it encourages the other person to see things from that perspective.
- The home page can no longer do X, which means that to me, it's the worst ever homepage
- That's a shame for you. I don't really use X, so I never realised that could be an issue before.
- Yeah, it's a real problem. I hope they fix it soon.
- Yeah, I agree. Come on Faithlife! While you're fixing my different problem, get this fixed too!
Now, obviously, it's not guaranteed to play out exactly like that! I've idealised the conversation. But hopefully, you can see the point. Acknowledging a criticism is from your own perspective usually leads to a much more constructive dialog because people are listening to your perspective, rather than trying to convert you to their perspective.
What you want is for Faithlife (and possibly other users) to see the problem from your perspective. If they do, hopefully they'll realise how important the issue is. And the best way you can help them to do that, is to acknowledge this is a personal perspective.
This might be done subtly: changing from "Logos 8 isn't ready for release" to "Logos 8 doesn't seem ready for release". Or it might be done more explicitly. "The home page can no longer for X, which I've relied on. I know that feature's coming, but it's absence makes it seem like Logos 8 isn't ready for release."
Either way, I think you'll get more people on side if you acknowledge that your criticisms made not apply to everyone and represent your personal perspective. And getting people on side is what matters here, I think.
PS: In case it's not clear, I'm not trying to censor you or tell you that you can't express an opinion. I'm simply saying that it's not always clear to other people — or at least to me — that what you're saying is your opinion (i.e. something from your perspective), and that can get people's backs up if they disagree with you. I don't want you to be less honest, less forthright or less frank. But I do want you to feel less bullied and less silenced when people respond to what you say, and I believe the suggestions I've made could be a real help to you in that.
If that is still not clear, or you're unhappy, I'm happy to follow up off-forum if you'd prefer: https://www.markbarnes.net/contact/
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Reminds me of this:
0 -
This Is The Oldest Customer Complaint In History
4000 year old, "from the time of Adam". Are we any different now?
Gold package, and original language material and ancient text material, SIL and UBS books, discourse Hebrew OT and Greek NT. PC with Windows 11
0 -
Using adventure and community to challenge young people to continually say "yes" to God
0 -
Mark you seem to be saying be wishy washy. the truth from my perspective is this is the worst home page FL has ever released. From my perspective I am certain of that experienc, it’s not that it seems like it might be the worst. From my experience it is the worst and the product was not ready for release. And I am not alone in saying that. So why as a paying customer should I not be honest of my experience and instead make statement that appear like I am uncertain of my experience which would then put people on these forums, who think it’s their job to quash anything anyone says they don’t like, in an even stronger position over me because I am comment with uncertainty. As I said previously as a paying customer I should be able to provide honest, open, truthful feedback on these forums without having other customers tell me I don’t have a right to do so or without being wishy washy about it and thus putting my feedback in a position where it appears I am asking for it to be validated first which is exactly what I am not seeking from other customer.
Ths is not a marriage relationship so your analogy doesn’t really make any sense in this situation though it was well intentioned. I don’t see others being wishy washy when they act outside of the forum guiibes and try to tear me down and they and others continue to make sniper remarks in posts they make. Start with telling them to pull their head in since they indicate they have it all so together. But I will continue to be open and honest in feedback of my experience to FL because I owe it to them to do so and I will not low myself to be pushed around on this forum. I’ve had enough of it in my personal life I’m not allowing to be done to me on a customer forum by other customers.
0
