This is by definition Gaslighting and Ad Hominem.
Is it a question?
.
The first rule of this site: Give us relevant informations about your question, about your problem.
Sometimes a screenshot gives more informations, sometimes an attached ODF type sample file gives more informations, sometimes a short video of your activity (in the application) gives more information.
.
The sentence “It not work!” can not give any information.
You was asked to upload a sample file in an another question of you, and you have not uploaded any sample file.
Then you’re a hypocrite because when the poster of that comment violated the rules you turned a blind eye too it.
That is clear from the fact that the rules also require too “Be civil.” and Not “post anything that a reasonable person would consider offensive, abusive, or hate speech.” which he did not do.
https://ask.libreoffice.org/faq
Unfortunately there is no such rule: “Do not be annoying, do not be non-responding member. Do not post/comment unusable dummy texts.”
We can not help you without relevant informations.
I didnt say or even imply there was so that’s a strawman fallacy.
The facts show you are here to denigrate me.
Here is a sample of your answers/comments:
“In the menu, click Insert - Page number and choose the position and type”
Didn’t work!
The page numbering works fine in the LibreOffice. You must show it us: what, how you did it in your problematic document.
This is not true. “By definition”, gaslighting is “manipulation of someone into questioning their perception of reality”. There was no sign of such a strange thing in my words - neither the quoted ones, or elsewhere in my answers to @iavswn. If you imply that denying the claim that others attacked you, or claiming that you attacked others, means “questioning your perception of reality”, then you effectively call any disagreement in the world “gaslighting”.
This is not true. “By definition”, Ad Hominem is “Attacking a person’s character or motivations” and “Appealing to the emotions rather than to logic or reason”. There was no sign of such a thing in my words - neither the quoted ones, or elsewhere in my answers to @iavswn. I claimed that you couldn’t explain yourself and I will claim that again, if needed. I described a way to move forward - in assumption that your motivation was exactly normal, i.e. to get a useful answer. I told that that way is only applicable if you actually have that expected motivation - which I explained as a possibility, separated from another possible motivation (which would be inappropriate on this site). I also claimed that what you already did was direct attacks - and that wasn’t anything attacking your character or motivation, just a description of facts (and yes, I believe you attacked people: e.g., your “End up being doxxed” in response to “Best to upload a sample document showing the issue but without any personal information” from @EarnestAl - where the request was explicitly “without any personal information”; or your “strawman attack” to their “I ask questions and I get pointless answers comments”, where there was zero (!) assumptions about “what you did” - only what Alistair gets).
You keep doing what I wrote there: flooding both this your “question”, and that other one, with a huge number of short messages, as if you used a messaging system. You still fight to “defend” that you are doing everything the right way - and that is absolutely uninteresting to everybody else: people here do not care how you do things; they may (and actually want!) to help people coming here and asking questions (and they are mostly just other users, just having significant experience helping them to help others); and when they see a question they can’t understand / help with, they try to help you improve it.
But … I already said “goodbye”, because I don’t care much about people who show more interest in defending themselves from imagined attacks, then in actually solving their problems with LibreOffice; much less than many other (too kind IMO) people here do, who keep asking you questions in the hope that they will eventually be able to provide a useful answer. I only took effort to directly answer this, because, well, you claimed things about me, personally.