A Loopology forum

I've noticed at least two comments about the lack of any Loopology forums, either here or at Adobe. I wondered what people's feelings were about this...

There are far too many things one could say about this that I can't think of, so you'll have to add them as comments if you want to. So, the poll questions are simple, and won't be added to. There are four possibilities, so you can't sit on the fence.

I don't do loops, but I certainly wouldn't be offended if a loopy forum were to appear.

Same as Karl.... I don't do "loops", but I'm sure that there's alot that do and, you never know............ I might be inspired to become a "loopologist"!

 

It could serve as a catalyst for making some of the pro's here start work on their own loop cd to sell for AM.org bandwith costs

I voted probably. I don't use it myself but I sometimes took a look anyway when the loopology site existed. And it seems there were quite some people into this so I guess a Loopology forum wouldn't hurt.

If by, "Would You Like To See A Loopology Forum ?" you mean, "Would I Care if People Posted Questions About Loops In One Of The Fifteen Existing Forums That We Seem To Need Here ?", then sure, that would be fine with me.  

If, on the other hand, you're seriously considering adding another forum to what is starting to become an unnavigatible mess, well then, no, I would prefer not to see a forum created for the two people (at least) that happened to mention something about one.  

Pretty soon, the ONLY way to move at this site is going to be by using the "unread posts" feature. And, I'm aware that a lot of people around here are already doing this. Which is interesting because, using that feature let's you work from the perspective of there only being one, big, combined forum, which staff seems to think is some sort of backwards fantasy.

I mean what's the goal here ?If you have a forum for every possible topic, then you won't have to bother reading the actual posts ? Because you'll already know what a post is about when placed in the "ASIO Drivers Wanted" forum. Or the "Headphones and Speakers" forum, or the "Which relative of Syd Barret is currently charged with his care ?" forum ?

I would like to have a forum entitled "Bit#! Until Your Throat Bleeds !" or "Ask the Asian !". No, better yet, " "Ask Tetsuro, the Adobe Audition Audio Asian !"  

William Rose Posted:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to have a forum entitled "Bit#! Until Your Throat Bleeds!

Surely YOU can see the irony in that.

 

If by, "Would You Like To See A Loopology Forum ?" you mean, "Would I Care if People Posted Questions About Loops In One Of The Fifteen Existing Forums That We Seem To Need Here ?", then sure, that would be fine with me.

No, the question is exactly as stated, and anyway, I made it 13, not 15...

If, on the other hand, you're seriously considering adding another forum to what is starting to become an unnavigatible mess, well then, no, I would prefer not to see a forum created for the two people (at least) that happened to mention something about one.

No, you are jumping to conclusions you can't justify about the reason for the question. If you consider not only the positive and negative responses, but also the total number of them, you can reach far more justifiable reasons for either creating, or equally not creating another forum. And so far, the evidence is quite firmly in the 'let's not have one' camp. When you consider also the number of hits the thread has had, it's also pretty clear than not everybody has even voted. The comments also lead me to think that there may be another approach to this, anyway.

Pretty soon, the ONLY way to move at this site is going to be by using the "unread posts" feature. And, I'm aware that a lot of people around here are already doing this. Which is interesting because, using that feature let's you work from the perspective of there only being one, big, combined forum, which staff seems to think is some sort of backwards fantasy.

I mean what's the goal here ?If you have a forum for every possible topic, then you won't have to bother reading the actual posts ? Because you'll already know what a post is about when placed in the "ASIO Drivers Wanted" forum. Or the "Headphones and Speakers" forum, or the "Which relative of Syd Barret is currently charged with his care ?" forum ?

The alternative model you are proposing seems to look a little like the main Adobe forum, and trying to navigate your way around that when people don't use sensible thread titles is an almightly pain. In fact, it's an almightly pain navigating there anyway because the message centre subscription system doesn't seem to take any acount of new threads. If there are a lot of posts randomly spread over a lot of subjects, and they are spread liberally over threads in date order, you could end up scrolling through miles of stuff just to get to all the added posts. And having the position of threads moving around is also a pain, IMHO. To make the single forum model work, you would need a much more powerful subscription system than we, or they, currently have. The system we have may be a compromise, but anybody just whingeing about it without even discussing the real issues it raises sensibly and just referring to the situation in 'fantasy' terms doesn't cut it at all as far as I'm concerned - I can't take your comments about this seriously until you do, I'm afraid.

I'm not suggesting that any system is perfect, but at least the 'generic categories' system we have, along with the 'read new posts' facility works a lot better than the Adobe one, and we're certainly not planning on throwing it out, as much because people are used to it as for any other reason. We have also said that it's flexible, and can be reviewed, certainly in category terms.

In answer to your specific point in para 2, the Audition wishlist is a good case in point. I don't suppose that David Johnson actually reads the whole of the forum posts at all - but he has indicated that he looks at posts of specific interest to him. Since he's still actively developing Audition, doesn't it make a sense, just for his benefit (and probably ours in the long run) for him to be able to find posts relating specifically to this in one place? Of course it does...

And you might also like to remind yourself of the other reasons for keeping the front page (with forum info) the way it is that were mentioned here, where you clearly said that you'd given up on this. Obviously you didn't mean it...

[large bold]

While I don't use any of it I voted "yes". It seems logical to do so, just like it is to have a "radio" forum. I fail to see William's problem about this. This is a very clean forum, and having a couple more forums to separate clearly defined subjects only adds to the structure. If there is a forum you are not interested in, don't visit it. Simple and fast. I never go to the "cep96",  "audition", "third party", "audition wishlist" or "radio" forums. I don't know the products or techniques so have nothing to say about them, nor use of the info.

Steve: I tried to post about the "sensible titles" thread in the announcements forum, but can't so as it surfaced here, I'll post it here: why not put it in large bold on the "edit post" page?

  I fail to see William's problem about this. This is a very clean forum, and having a couple more forums to separate clearly defined subjects only adds to the structure. If there is a forum you are not interested in, don't visit it. Simple and fast. I never go to the "cep96",  "audition", "third party", "audition wishlist" or "radio" forums. I don't know the products or techniques so have nothing to say about them, nor use of the info.

Havoc, you've brilliantly illustrated my "problem" and my point. And,  added missing support to my primary argument which, until now, was largely based on a "feeling" about the tendencies of most visitors. It's a well documented fact that a tiny fraction of the people that visit this forum are responsible for most of it's content, so it's almost irrelavant how the current body of posts indicate the effectiveness of the forum''s layout.

In other words, it doesn't matter what we think, or what our stated preference is. There is a right and a wrong answer, or at most, a very narrow range of responses to the question of what works best.

So here's the surprise, Havoc. There's no functional difference between the CE Pro forum, and the Audition and CE96-2K forums ! You are just as likely to find information of interest in one as you are the others.

And that's my point entirely. You've neglected a portion of the forum because it appears to be separate and unrelated, when in fact, it's not. So, a direct result of this absurdity is exactly what I suspected it was - Fewer posts being read. A smaller body of potential contributors. So even though we've learned to live with it, it's a negative. A detractor. And it shouldn't have been, and doesn't have to be.

... You are just as likely to find information of interest in one as you are the others. ...

 

In general, and usually, no.  Could it occur every so often, and rarely?  Yes.  But,  I don't go to the Radio or Plugins forum in hopes of finding some nugget of enlightenment about multi-track recording or why the software seems to have memory problems.  I go to Radio to learn about Radio, or Plugins to boneup on Plugins.  

I sure don't wander over to the yogurts in the dairy case in hopes I might find someone placed some ham there.

You don't regularly drill for oil where you'll only get a 3 day supply.

(... enough of pithy observations ....)  --

And that's my point entirely. You've neglected a portion of the forum because it appears to be separate and unrelated, when in fact, it's not. So, a direct result of this absurdity is exactly what I suspected it was - Fewer posts being read. A smaller body of potential contributors. So even though we've learned to live with it, it's a negative. A detractor. And it shouldn't have been, and doesn't have to be.

There are, of course, a number of non sequiturs in this argument - to base your opinion of how everybody reads the forum based on how one person does is just silly.  And if Havoc thinks that there's nothing for him in the forums he doesn't read, this is probably because he's looked in them and knows this to be true. And to say that all the forums are the same is just plain wrong. Cal's take on this is far more reasoned, and reasonable than yours.

There isn't anything 'negative' about this - and I think that it should have been the way it is. It wasn't wrong when we started, and it isn't wrong now - if it was, then everybody would be complaining, and they're not. You are entitled to have a different set of values - that's your privilege. It is our privilege not to share them.

 
There are, of course, a number of non sequiturs in this argument - to base your opinion of how everybody reads the forum based on how one person does is just silly.  And if Havoc thinks that there's nothing for him in the forums he doesn't read, this is probably because he's looked in them and knows this to be true. And to say that all the forums are the same is just plain wrong. Cal's take on this is far more reasoned, and reasonable than yours.

There isn't anything 'negative' about this - and I think that it should have been the way it is. It wasn't wrong when we started, and it isn't wrong now - if it was, then everybody would be complaining, and they're not. You are entitled to have a different set of values - that's your privilege. It is our privilege not to share them.

I don't know who's post Cal was referring to, but it certainly wasn't mine. Or you, Steve, for that matter.

Why do I have to clarify what is plainly written on this very page? But here we go...

A ) Havoc indicated that he visited the Cool Edit Pro forum, but did not visit the Audition or Cool Edit 96 forum.

The content of these three forums is effectively identical ! You cannot correctly beleive that there's nothing in the remaining two that would be  of any interest to you if you regularly visit the third. That's what I said earlier, three posts ago. Go back and read it again. But this time, sound out the words.

B) I didn't say all the forums were the same. Anywhere. Ever. Why did you make it appear as if I did in your post Steve ? Where did you read that ?

C ) I didn't decide everybody is like Havoc. I didn't say that. Why did you indicate that I did ? I didn't even imply it. But I can and did extrapolate from Havoc's post, that there must be others like him. And I think that's reasonable. More reasonable than assuming he's unique, isn't it ? What really makes my blood boil about this kind of behavior Steve, is that I know you can read English better than your response here indicates. You're deliberately misrepresenting, and just plain mangling my words. But if that's what you have to do in order to present a counter, then I guess that's what you have to do.

Apart from the very last sentence, and the erroneous inclusion of the word "most" (it should have been 'many'), my previous post is largely a  statement of fact. I'm not offering my opinion in it, and at worst, I'm merely making some simple conclusions based on Havoc's input. But you seem to feel Havoc's input is somehow invalid, or atypical ? I think Havoc is an important part of the community, and note should be taken of his habits.

And since when would everybody be complaining about something if it was less than ideal ? Who, the ten of us ? If that's your standard for determining the best approach, well then, you can obviously write your own ticket.

Like I said, Cal's post doesn't have anything to do with mine, and yours is just a distortion of what I said, written apparently, with the idea that nobody's going to notice that you made a great deal of it up, loosely based on I don't know what.

Poor form, SteveG.

I have replied to the spirit of your argument, not the exact words. And regardless of anything you have to say about it, nothing's changing about the basic structure of the forum, so you are wasting your time arguing about it. You should have realised by now that you are effectively in a minority of one about this, but you just can't accept that, can you?

Silly arguments are fun to watch.  (of course, this comment is not intended as disrespectful to either party, nor is blahdey blah blah)

The argument boils down to:

• With three separate forums, many Audition users never see generic posts made in the CEP forum, and vice versa.
• Things become mixed up and hard to separate if you only had one forum, and you can count on newbies to not say which software they're using first time around[/list:u]
  
  The first time I've visited the CE2k forum in a long while, I see:
  Can I stretch an ending chord
  Good sounding mono
  A couple of DC offset questions
  Reverb or echo chamber
  What order to apply transforms..
  
  A quick estimate sais 2/3 of the posts there could easily be moved into a general CEP/AA forum.   The same is obviously true for the Audition forum until something is changed in the program.
  
  My favourite option would be to have subforums..   A CEP/AA general folder which all the generic questions go into, and then specific CE2K, CEP & AA folders for the software specific questions.   If this was done, it wouldn't be likely until phpBB 2.2 comes out, because you either have subforums or file attachments, rarely do both peacefully live side by side
  
  
  My guess is Cal mis-interpreted the foaming-from-the-mouth argument of Williams, nobody said chicken fried steak would be found in the Polls forum or vice versa, but you will find the exact same questions in the CE2K forum as you do in the CEP forum and vice versa
  
  And finally, William probably isn't in a minority of one.  I somewhat feel the same way, too many fora become a pain to look through.  With only 10 members interested enough in the forums structure/operation to comment about it, you can't really get a general idea on user opinions anyway.