John
An observation. I don't normally start threads. I tend to respond to threads already started. On the few occasions I have started threads they tend to be informative. Meant to convey something. I'm not therefore in the position of asking for information very often. I think this has me viewing the forum more as a data base. A repository of information that can be searched or browsed. This would have me coming to it from perhaps a different perspective from Conley.  Because a title post from his perspective may be from a wish to receive something that is both critical and timely. The need for the post to not be tampered with in any way is part of the nature of making sure that he is giving accurate information and can count on receiving as accurate information in return. He isn't looking at the forum as a large repository of data but rather discrete, independent conversations that have at their core, accuracy. That becomes paramount. Where for me its ease of retrieval that is more important. 
 
I don't know how one can reconcile these two views. But I do believe Conley has a legitimate fear that I should not be so dismissive of.
 
At the same time I honestly don't believe that appending a single word to a title is anything less then helpful for the vast majority of forum users. The rationale seems solid to me and I have used it to skip by completed threads. Ones I know do not need me to post an answer. 
 
So I see it as a way for admins to mark threads as "taken care of" thus leaving more time for other threads. This also has the added bonus of advertising a completed problem and its resolution for those that wish to read about it.  The originator may feel put off because no permission was given for changing the title.   
 
The only thing to say is no real harm is done by the change. It is to me very beneficial. 

Thanks John, that is exactly how I view the forum. I do search first, but not too much. As you may notice I do not post much around here in the forum, but when I do, I usually need help with something not working correctly while I am working with someone or something or venting my frustration. I have had my share of trolls and I choose not to take that persona.

My initial post was an innocent request. It was not meant to disparage anyone. I was even making sure that I was appreciative of the help I had received prior. As new things come into peoples lives, change is not often accepted with open arms. I can deal with whatever the community decides is normal. I was just not used to it. I know there are changes at Cakewalk and this is probably part of those changes. So be it for the better.
Thanks to all who participated and expressed your opinions. We all have one and we know what that is like. Now would someone please lock this thread or delete it?  :-D

Andrew Rossa [Cakewalk]
 
I guess you can't win. You want us to be more heavily involved but at the same time a benign action like marking a post solved (when prob 99% of the time it is) seems to bother you. The time it takes to mark a post solved is far less than re-reading the same threads over and over again only to realize the issue is solved. Honestly, I don't see big deal at all.

I really don't like the tone of this statement.  Meddling in poster's titles was one thing, but this is a whole next level of control.  I'm flabbergasted.
 
I suggest you lock threads the minute they don't interest you any more.
 

Paul P

Andrew Rossa [Cakewalk]
 
I guess you can't win. You want us to be more heavily involved but at the same time a benign action like marking a post solved (when prob 99% of the time it is) seems to bother you. The time it takes to mark a post solved is far less than re-reading the same threads over and over again only to realize the issue is solved. Honestly, I don't see big deal at all.

I really don't like the tone of this statement.  Meddling in poster's titles was one thing, but this is a whole next level of control.  I'm flabbergasted.
 
I suggest you lock threads the minute they don't interest you any more.
 

I think you misread my post or intention. I am not sure what this whole next level of control is beyond just tagging a title solved or answered...and I am not sure what you are talking about in regards to threads that don't interest me anymore and that I should lock them. Did I miss something here?
 
The point is still pretty simple. It's just tagging the subject line (not editing anything in the post or subject line at all) with a solved or answered so staff and others can see an issue was resolved. It makes it a lot easier to browse and help more users. The benefit is pretty simple. The con I guess is that we added a word in front of your subject line, which is still intact otherwise. 

Paul P

Andrew Rossa [Cakewalk]
 
I guess you can't win. You want us to be more heavily involved but at the same time a benign action like marking a post solved (when prob 99% of the time it is) seems to bother you. The time it takes to mark a post solved is far less than re-reading the same threads over and over again only to realize the issue is solved. Honestly, I don't see big deal at all.

I really don't like the tone of this statement.  Meddling in poster's titles was one thing, but this is a whole next level of control.  I'm flabbergasted.

[Wrote this before realizing Andrew had posted a response, but it might clarify matters further.]
 
He's not saying marking a thread "solved" substitutes for reading a thread to see if it's solved. He's saying that if a thread is marked as solved (which applies to whether an end user or an admin does it), that will save time compared to people not knowing a problem has been solved, which will likely cause them to start a similar or identical thread that generates redundant pages.
 
If a thread about that problem has been flagged as "solved," although there's no guarantee users will see the thread title and know it's been solved, not flagging it as "solved" guarantees they won't know the thread contains a solution unless they read it all the way through to the end. Then they may have to go through multiple identical threads until they find one that actually does have a solution.
 
The whole point is to save time for people who use this forum - both users and admin. If I see a problem has been solved, I don't have to spend time going to the thread to see if I can find a solution that will help someone. They've already been helped. I can move on to a problem that hasn't been solved and see if I can find a solution. Users can check the "solved" threads to see if any of the solutions apply to issues they've had or may have in the future.
 
I think this is all very clear and whether people agree or not, they understand the intent behind trying to help users get more out of this forum. There's nothing more I can say on the subject that hasn't already been said. However I did notice you're from Montreal, so if English is not your native language, I'm fluent in French and can translate if you'd like.

i suggest that fixing the forum search functionality would be a good thing

and, again, publishing a maintained known issues list stickied at the top of the forum - keep all the reproducible/known issues in one place - easier for everyone :-)

lawp
and, again, publishing a maintained known issues list stickied at the top of the forum - keep all the reproducible/known issues in one place - easier for everyone :-)

Actually I suggest this needs to be kept out of the forums and documented on another web page (ideally using tracker software perhaps such as https://www.atlassian.com/). Of course this will be down to Cakewalk's policy here (depends how open they want to be).

I see it as they are showing that they care. they are here helping.
by putting solved on the end of it, it means they don't have to trip over the same thread over and over, and know its done.
it doesn't bother me much, besides, if you need more help just pm one of them or reopen it :-)
 
 

John

One can start a thread but it does not belong to them.

I agree with John on this. It's an "open" discussion.

Paul P

I really don't like the tone of this statement. 

You have got to be kidding me!! You haven't heard him say anything , so how can you judge his "tone!?"

I dislike censorship just as much as the next guy. But jumping to conclusions like this is unfounded.

The bakers are here to help. Let them do it.

You know what I dislike more than censorship?