Karyn
Well, I've been talking to Matt at microphone parts and the FET circuit they use doesn't support fig 8, but I've ordered one anyway, with the RK-87 capsule.
If anyone's interested I'll create a build thread, maybe in the software forum.
bapu
Karyn
Well, I've been talking to Matt at microphone parts and the FET circuit they use doesn't support fig 8, but I've ordered one anyway, with the RK-87 capsule.
If anyone's interested I'll create a build thread, maybe in the software forum.
I'll move it to Songs then.
bapu
So........ where do I post about my latest pictures of my origami projects?
Hardware? Software? Techniques?
Sorry, but as I mentioned
HERE, I don't find the perceived abuse of hosts' privileges remotely funny.
Are we not allowed to even talk about this like adults in the forum anymore?
Or is the only option available to us to approach Ryan or Willy? As is apparent, that method would just be a manifest waste of everyone's time. Like I said before, there's only going to be one winner in that situation.
If, however, it is permissible to actually discuss these matters in public, is "trying to laugh it off" the only method of response you are sanctioned to employ?
If you think the optimum method of answering the legitimate concerns I expressed in post #2 is to try and belittle me with flippant comments about your powers to move threads, then I find that attitude just a little irresponsible. It's also rather sad, in my honest opinion.
I believe my comments were worthy of perhaps a little more gravity than they've received. I think I have every right to suggest that this thread appears to exemplify the double standards now applicable to hosts and ordinary forum members.
Karyn
** Personally I would deem just about any conversation between people in the Coffee House as being music related in this context on the basis that they're all musicians.
Just because it's in the Coffee House is irrelevant. You've made quite a few judgement calls recently when it comes to moving threads. Why should your own posts be any difference?
As I said, I couldn't give a flying fig what gets posted where. But when we have a case of someone having 'resigned' from the forum allegedly because of the continual moving of their threads by the perceived over-zealous actions of one of the hosts, I might have thought that my perfectly relevant comments and concerns above were worthy of something a little more grown-up, and certainly a little less sarcastic.
It's sad to say that as far as some of the hosts are concerned, I simply don't know you anymore. And as for all the party-line gibberish about 'nothing changing' and 'we're still the same people', well, it's plain to see that some of you are not.
I voiced a perfectly valid concern in the
THREAD I referred to above, in that I knew my actions were deemed worthy of discussion in your private forum. What I neglected to mention were my specific reasons for that concern.
If I'd transgressed the forum Code of Conduct, I wouldn't have had the slightest problem with all of you chatting about it in private, and subsequently deciding on any appropriate action. What annoyed me was that, in my opinion, a forum host was abusing their privileged position to further a personal grudge against me.
To my mind anyway, that's not fair, and certainly not what I'd been led to believe was in the remit of the hosts.
I notice that the matter of forums appearing on the menu page that should remain invisible to 'normal' paying customers was mentioned in John's recent thread.
Karyn
The forum software has a bug. Every now and then, for no apparent reason, forums that should be hidden become visible. You can't access those forums, even though you can see they exist.
There are many forums here, not just the public ones you normally see. The Bakers have their own sections as well for their own uses. They are also hidden from us as you'd expect.
The forum software devs (3rd party) have been told about this many times and have not fixed it.
You wouldn't expect the Bakers to release new software without beta testing it first would you?
That's all well and good. But, however, it's certainly not strictly accurate.
On certain occasions, it
has most definitely been possible to access the 'hidden' forums. I know this to be true because it's happened to me, and others have contacted me to let me know it's happened to them too.
On one occasion, I immediately reported the matter to a Cakewalk Administrator. I believed that was the correct course of action because the contents of that particular hidden forum would have been compromised, as would the 'normal' members who frequented it. If I remember correctly, I promised that I would never divulge anything I saw there, or the names of any of its contributors. And that's exactly how it's stayed.
This is how I 'knew' I'd been discussed, and why. Yet Karyn and Ryan both denied it in public.
I can accept it from Ryan. It's forum policy to keep things running smoothly, and if a little white lie helps to accomplish this, that's perfectly understandable.
But I'm afraid I just can't accept that from Karyn. We've laughed and joked together in here for years, we've even exchanged the odd PM now and again. As far as I'm concerned, that means nothing to me now.
All I asked for was at least an acknowledgement that such a discussion had occurred, and maybe even the opportunity to defend myself. A simple "Yes Steve, you've been a bit of a twit and we thought it appropriate to discuss the matter" would have amply sufficed.
As it doesn't really bother me too much if I've been made to look like I'm making this stuff up, or simply clutching at straws if you like, I was happy enough to let it slide in the cause of 'community cohesion' and all that. After all, I doubt anybody really cares what I think anyway.
So I ask you Karyn, if I actually have to
prove that I was correct all along, would you consider your position as forum host. Would it get me banned?
Either way, I'm getting to the stage where I just couldn't care.
And when all's said and done, I reckon that's pretty sad.