microapp
The OP asks a legit question. A simple question, but because he implies it could be a secret, and I reply that it IS a secret, Anderton's obsfucation program kicks in and off we go into spin land.
After you wrote the second post, there were
nine posts by others of a humorous nature
before I joined in with a humorous post of my own about how it depended on whether you counted extra-terrestrials, because ETs and reverse engineering of same have been a running joke in this forum for years now. I highly doubt anyone else in this thread would misinterpret my joining in on the fun as an "obfuscation program" or going into "spin land."
And then later I said "For the record, I don't know how many employees Cakewalk has. But there may be no easy answer if some people are contracted, others are remote employees, some are part-time, etc."
At which point you deflected that into a tangent about whether Cakewalk does or does not know how many people they're paying. So I explained why I thought there was no easy answer.
I was hoping that, due to the expertise you claim and which I assume is true, you would come back to comment and add a further explanation about how companies break down part-time employees, consultants, etc. You didn't, so I contributed what else I knew.
Then you
did come in and comment, but I still don't see how one could count consultants (unless signed to long-term exclusive contracts, one piece of interesting knowledge you did contribute) or interns as employees. I took the OP's question at face value: the people like Noel, Lance, Keith, etc. who are full-time employees. I've been self-employed all my life, Gibson is the first job I've ever held as an employee. So I truly have NO IDEA what counts as an employee in Microapp-world. I really don't think people who develop expansion packs for a zillion different companies qualify as employees, but apparently you have some reason for thinking so. I always thought that the IRS made up the definitions, and it's people who get W2s.
microappDo you see how the simple question was deflected into something completely different ?
No. It looks pretty straightforward to me: No one had an answer, the second post you made claimed it was a big secret and that Gibson didn't have to provide this info, the only person in this thread who could
conceivably have an idea is me and I don't, and since it was obvious no answer would be forthcoming, people decided to have fun. If you want to see spin machines, obfuscations, and conspiracy theories, that's your right and your privilege.