The CH will be much different if we all think before we posted!

MQThink before you post.

John

What I see is some one that thinks its just fine on a forum to malign others and name call and to attack the other with apparent impunity. To me that is a disgrace. Why isn't Mike and those that support the idea behind the OP countering this post of Steve's with a simple disavowing.  Nothing will change here as long as a post like Steve's is greeted with no comment from those that don't want the forum inundated with this kind of behavior.

It doesn't matter what view one has about the product. It doesn't matter where one stands on CW.  What matters is how we as members treat each other.  As long as the post by Steve is acceptable to the forum and no one comments on it people like Steve will feel free to be as nasty to others as they wish.

If that is fine to you then what ever else you say here is absurd. Fix it here or be silent always.  

 

Jonbouy

John

Jonbouy

John

grumbleweed4162

John


I don't know why don't you try and report back?

Though I don't know what good they would do if you don't have X1.

Of course you may want CW to give X1 away free thus you can have some use for those patches.

Oh BTW you would only need to DL the C patch because it has all the other patches in it as well.

It may be best not to humour him. This thread will only get longer and for what point?

You're right!

Correction, you merely agree with the TOS violation here.

There's no right about it.

I have no idea what you are going on about.

If you are so concerned about a TOS violation perhaps you would tell your friend to stop trolling against CW. Or don't you see the implied bashing in Mikes post?

I see his post as a response to your refusal to see anything but your view on how updates are funded.

Mike is saying he would actually pay (and does) directly for improvements to the issues he has with software to be implemented.  And yet you seem to be on a crusade to silence or derail any voice that doesn't ring in harmony with your views.

But you carry on mate you're going to do whatever you are going to do.

I've never seen the forum in the state it's currently in where pretty much every thread is reduced to rubble where at one time there used to be reasoned debate.  Sides used to be taken on point not personalities.

There were enough people around at that time though for you to be a just minor in the background annoyance now you've managed to overrun this place...well done mate.

I don't even care anymore.

If I annoy you I have done my duty then.

My refusal to agree with Mike? How ridiculous. Since when is it that anyone has to agree with Mike?

All I see with Mike is a troll that is trying to persuade people not to buy X1. I see you as providing backup for him.

I think that is an outrage and should be stopped. If you two were on an independent forum I would not have an issue with what you both are trying to do. Here I think CW should ban you both.

I have had a very high regard for Mike in the past. I now see him as having only one intent.

John

SteveStrummerUK



What drives me up the wall is the vomit-inducing sycophancy.

One would think  that if one is having such a reaction they would avoid the forum.

And not just the cringeworthy and misplaced loyalty to a company that, and let's be brutally honest here, exist mainly to separate them and the rest of us from our money.

This sounds as if a forum member has to be antagonistic to the provider of the forum to be seen in your eyes as acceptable. My understanding for having the forum is to provide a way for users to compare notes on issues and using it to fix problems. To help one another use the product efficiently. I don't think CW had in mind that it would ever become a platform to constantly bash both the company and the product.   

It's exactly as Mike says, it exists just as much among the '+1' and the 'LMAO' mob that follow up their pathetic diatribes, and serve only to encourage them.

The only diatribes come from those that are either upset with how something is not working or against those that offer advice to help get a problem solved.

To use a school analogy, you could imagine the fanbois are the teacher's pets to Cakewalk's staff (the teachers) and as such, are allowed much more leeway in their behaviour. Even if they do cross the line, the authoritative words may appear strong but the actions are weak.

 As in school from immature children name calling is used to minimize the humanity of another person. It is anti TOS and because no one seems to be able to say stop it I will.

The toadies that follow the fanbois like sickly sheep are the unpopular kids who'll do and say anything to get in the gang - quite abhorrent really.

Same as above. Except that because name calling is used with such fervor the message is ignored. Only the name calling is noticed.

And I'm with Bub - talking in generic terms may be politically correct, but let's call a spade a spade...

Isn't that the same as a + 1?

John is, without doubt, the biggest bootlicking backslapping fanboi on the planet. I once suggested to him that if Cakewalk sent him a turd in a box and called it X2 he'd be on the forum within seconds defending it to the hilt and lying that it smelt of French perfume. He called me 'negative' so I politely explained (as I believe both JB and Bub have done recently) that Cakewalk don't need people telling them that everything in the garden is rosy, an 'Emperor's new clothes' syndrome if you like, but honest feedback. I said I was wasn't being negative, I was being realistic - big difference I'm sure you'd agree.

This is to me a violation of the TOS.

And the other prefect - John T (who I postulate has recently usurped John as head boy), has got to be the most odious, execrable, hypocritical and sanctimonious creep I've ever had the mispleasure to encounter. How someone can, when they've lost an argument, stoop so low as to say they hope their adversary would "die in a fire" is quite beyond my understanding. And there have been many other examples - all conveniently ignored by the powers that be.

It's a disgrace.

What I see is some one that thinks its just fine on a forum to malign others and name call and to attack the other with apparent impunity. To me that is a disgrace. Why isn't Mike and those that support the idea behind the OP countering this post of Steve's with a simple disavowing.  Nothing will change here as long as a post like Steve's is greeted with no comment from those that don't want the forum inundated with this kind of behavior.
 

It doesn't matter what view one has about the product. It doesn't matter where one stands on CW.  What matters is how we as members treat each other.  As long as the post by Steve is acceptable to the forum and no one comments on it people like Steve will feel free to be as nasty to others as they wish.

If that is fine to you then what ever else you say here is absurd. Fix it here or be silent always.

John, I know your not a stupid man, so I can only assume you didn't see the list of John T's quotes that Jonbouy posted the other day. Or maybe you've conveniently forgotten your own public statement that you see it as your 'duty' to annoy Jon? And didn't you recently get a public rebuke by a moderator asking you to 'calm down'? Now I'm no scholar of the English language, but to me these few examples (of many) seem like perfect examples of diatribe.

I notice you don't mention John T's comments in the same breath. So I can only assume that you condone his behaviour? If you're going play forum police, you have a duty to be impartial - no? Or would I be right in assuming  that because you seem to agree with everything he says you're not too worried about the manner in which he composes his posts?

John

SteveStrummerUK



John, I see Jonbouy has been banned - are you happy now?

No doubt I'll be next. And all because you can't behave yourself.

It's a disgrace.

I implore you to retract your reports.

Or get busy and start reporting John T's remarks immediately - otherwise you are nothing but a coward and a hypocrite.

I may not always agree with everything you say, but I've always held some respect for you. If Jon has been banned as a result of your actions, then that evaporated completely today.

I had nothing to do with him being banned. I didn't even know about until seeing this post. I had blocked him thats all.

Why would you blame me for his banning? Is it not his posts that caused it? I have not seen his posts so I don't know. If you look I have not responded to anything he posted. The reason is I didn't see it.

If you feel that you are next its because you must feel that you post ban-able stuff.

"trimph1"
Maybe if we actually treated each other the way we would want to be treated we would not be seeing the kinds of threads we see upstairs..or anywhere else for that matter.