Just realised we are in problem reports will change

Alex, as I said in the other thread:
 
I don't think it was an attempt to exercise power, it appears on the surface with a cursory read like the thread is about distributing info on SONAR. So the reason for moving it was probably because it was moved too hurriedly, not maliciously. 


For whatever reasons, it really wasn't clear to me from the initial post that this was a problem report so it wouldn't surprise me that someone else would see it the same way, and try to be helpful by moving it to the general SONAR discussion forum. I do think there is confusion sometimes about what's a "SONAR thing" and what's a "problem thing" but I don't have an easy solution for that. Judgement calls will be made and sometimes they'll be correct, sometimes not.

Alex, Cakewalk's choice of what they do or do not distribute with their software is their choice. If you disagree with that then please feel free to tell them so, just not in the problem reports forum.
 
If you have a specific issue with (say) your VS-100 that you know may be fixed by a new version of the control surface .dll then please create a report stating the nature of the problem, etc.. just as you know it should be done.
 
Simple stating your opinion and then complaining when others disagree is not what the Problem Reports forum is for.

Craig if they don't see it that way they need to give an explanation first before they move it and allow me to respond. There are no troubleshooting problems and the issue is clear. It fulfils handbook guidelines.

The reality is that the issue may still get withdrawn, but in this instance it's Cakewalk's decision and it's not down to opinions.

And the worst thing of all this is moving issues around forums without giving reasons why... That's either sloppy or authoritarian.

Karyn... As I said it's all documented in github which cakewalk maintains. Allow cakewalk to decide how to handle this issue, there is nothing wrong with it.

The issue is entirely clear. The DLL's need to be distributed,this will fix bugs as documented in github. That's the problem report. Don't make it any more complicated.

Doktor Avalanchehandbook guidelines.

is this the published version of the handbook, which you previously said needed correcting/updating, or your imaginary corrected/updated version, that we're working from here? got a cwbr number and verification by other users? steps to reproduce perhaps?

Seriously you haven't a clue this isn't a troubleshooting issue it's a distribution issue and it's clear. Please go and discuss this in the forum discussion forums, this thread does not need any further pollution, if you read my posts it could not be clearer. I don't want this issue going around in circles.

feature request maybe then?

Thanks for polluting my issue very helpful. Leave it to Cakewalk and not your opinions.

is pollution mentioned in the handbook?