Ryan Munnis [Cakewalk] I'm not sure how your post is helpful, despite pwalpwal marking it helpful. In fact this is a direct example of how it's difficult for us to help users when they work against us.

that implies that i'm working against you? thanks for that, sorry i'm not a "yes man"
 
the intention is to flag that the bakery is not intuitive, and not fully baked
 
edit to add: watch the "nosedive" episode of black mirror if you haven't already seen it...

bapu
*That's not so say a .net programmer can't work on a website but it's rare that a web developer is also an application developer IME.
 

it's quite common ime, when the dev is "in house", typical management shortcut

pwalpwal

Ryan Munnis [Cakewalk] I'm not sure how your post is helpful, despite pwalpwal marking it helpful. In fact this is a direct example of how it's difficult for us to help users when they work against us.

that implies that i'm working against you? thanks for that, sorry i'm not a "yes man"
 
the intention is to flag that the bakery is not intuitive, and not fully baked

Not asking you to be a yes man. I appreciate the feedback and am just asking for feedback we can work with. If it's unspoken it's hard to decipher.
 
Typing in all caps in threads on The Bakery as you're finding issues does make it difficult to interact with you. Please try to consider if I took that approach.
 
You're correct, there are still a lot of things being worked on with it so anything you find definitely bug up in The Bakery so we can get it addressed.

Thanks for the explanation Ryan. It's beginning to make since to me now. I'll be watching this new forum to see how it all plays out. 

ChristopherM
Am I the only one who gets a bad feeling when it takes Ryan more paragraphs than I had time to read to explain the rationale? Am I the only one who feels that the rating system is uncomfortably redolent of Black Mirror's Nosedive? 

No.

ChristopherM
Hey, Ryan - How did you determine that I was working against you? You may or may not know that Nosedive is a cautionary parable about what goes wrong when an algorithmic rating system is too thoroughly and rigorously applied. It is, of course, fiction. I referenced it because the Bakery's rating scheme appears to have that kind of rigidity and therefore I am concerned that it will over-react. The present forum thankfully only allows soft censorship - posts can be marked as helpful and people can support or criticise ideas without fear of being disappeared. A user can block any other user without that affecting anybody else. If someone acts grossly against the forum guidelines, they may be banned only after review by a human being, but that is rightly a last resort. All of this appears to work. Automating it and locking it to a rigid scheme sounds like a backward step to me. I am not working against you - I am just articulating a concern. , and unfortunately the tenor of your response heightens my concern. Would my signal be regarded as noise in your new scheme?
 

Thanks Christopher for elaborating further. This is helpful feedback and when expressed in more detail makes much more sense to me. Right now nothing is overly aggressive and, as I was mentioning, we may tweak things as we go and I anticipate that this will be the case. We don't have any real feedback to go off yet though so it's difficult to say with any guarantee if we did a good job initially at setting up the system. The goal is definitely not to punish anyone and, if anything, is more focused on allowing us to relate whether or not Ideas and Answers to questions are good ones that are resulting in a positive outcome. We realize our posters are human beings and don't want a machine to dictate whether or not they're viewed as valuable.
 
I guess to explain my remark about working against us, I did say the signal and rewards were a work in progress, but since you said you didn't have the time to read my post in it's entirety, the feedback seemed like a stab at me and my attempt at explaining something. If you have a bad feeling, than my hope was to try to address it with my post, not have it glossed over and then have another member mark an indirect response as helpful without any insight as to why until I brought it up.
 
I guess, in other words, when we try to engage and users end up tallking to each-other around/about us, it doesn't seem as productive.
 
It's going to be difficult to discuss any of the merits of the system until some people spend some time with it, which is definitely what I encourage. I'm sure bugs will be pointed out, concerns will be raised, and we'll address them to the best of our ability.

bitman
We're all gonna die!

Some sooner than others is the most likely outcome.


JMO.

I submit that if the Bakery had been the only feedback mechanism for all these years and Cakewalk eliminated it in favor of a forum, people would be flipping out. "How can  anyone expect to pull meaningful data from a forum? It's an uncurated mess! I can never find what I want...the search function sucks, I have to use Google to find anything. Obviously Cakewalk isn't interested in meaningful feedback any more. It's sad, really. Eliminating the Bakery just proves that CW no longer cares about what their customers think."
 
 

bapu

pwalpwal

bapu
*That's not so say a .net programmer can't work on a website but it's rare that a web developer is also an application developer IME.
 

it's quite common ime, when the dev is "in house", typical management shortcut

ChristopherM

bapu

tenfoot
On the other hand, having just checked out the list of November updates, my bad. I take it all back.  It certainly hasn't slowed anything down! All power to the bakers:)

And The Bakery would not impede SONAR developement.
 
The Bakery and SONAR developemnt require two different day-to-day skillsets*
 
 
*That's not so say a .net programmer can't work on a website but it's rare that a web developer is also an application developer IME.
 

They may require different skillsets, but presumably they are competing for the same scarce funds.
 

The two of you seem assume that since it's what you may have experienced in the past it *must* be so at a company where you have no knowledge of it's inner workings.


I prefer to keep an open mind and assume, until told otherwise, that maybe just maybe The Bakers would be savvy enough to never put SONAR developers on web development stuff.
 

not *must* but *quite common* in my experience, especially when belts are being tightened
 
xoxox

@ryan, sorry for the CAPS but i was frustrated and couldn't be bothered correcting them
 

Cakewalk SONAR devs are definitely not the same human beings as Cakewalk web devs. SONAR devs are not even human for that matter.

pwalpwal
 
not *must* but *quite common* in my experience, especially when belts are being tightened
 
xoxox

 
 

ChristopherM
@Bapu - Competing for scarce resources is unlikely to be behaviour that Cakewalk has eliminated. I don't think that I am being pessimistic here, either. But your misinterpretation of my comment makes me realise that I'd be voted down-and-out pretty quickly. And, although I'd never claim that my contributions have any great value, I don't think that things certainly get better as a result of suppressing anyone's contribution.

Ryan Munnis [Cakewalk]
Cakewalk SONAR devs are definitely not the same human beings as Cakewalk web devs. SONAR devs are not even human for that matter.

And there you have it gentlemen. Facts is facts.
 
Are you still "climate deniers"?

Ryan Munnis [Cakewalk]
Cakewalk SONAR devs are definitely not the same human beings as Cakewalk web devs. SONAR devs are not even human for that matter.

 
Careful, Ryan. We had to terminate Cakealex/Splat/Doktor Avalanche when he started spilling the beans about the grays. 
 
People are already suspecting reverse engineering of alien technology due to the 2016.11 update allowing internal sound cards to have lower latency than Thunderbolt interfaces. I realize you're just trying to be transparent with the community, but the Men in Black take a very dim view of this kind of public disclosure.