Yea, it worked real well for the Heaven'swhatever guy. Except he would have had about two people posting in his threads, maybe not even that.

My basic assumption would be that people are generally soliciting opinion on products from their peers, not from the marketing department of the product makers.

So a suggestion :

If the OP of a 'which plugin?' type thread does want to solicit opinions direct from the devs as well as his peers, then they 'opt in' by flagging the thread somehow (eg a [DEV] flag in the subject). I think it makes more sense to make the default opt-out rather than opt-in, though.

At the very least, if someone is asking for a 'what synth' opinion, and says 'no developers' when they do, devs should be made to respect that.(*)

Make that standard behaviour here, make it part of the rules, and uncle's yer robert...


(*) Note that Im not talking about devs not being able to reply to criticism, or whatever. I specifically mean not suggesting their own products as per this thread.
Last edited by whyterabbyt on Thu Aug 23, 2012 12:43 am; edited 1 time in total

Its because your relying on digital technology for the coffee. For the best flavour you need to use analog equipment.

I don't know, my basic assumption is when people ask a question like that is they are asking the community (I know I am when I do that) and I have always seen the KvR community as including devs, indeed that was always one of its strengths and attractions. It seems to be getting a bit "us and them" ish at the moment and I'm not sure starting "dev keep out" type threads would help that, particularly since the dividing line is often not that clear cut anyway (which is a good thing).

Sean did raise an interesting idea though. If someone wanted opinions on some sorts of instruments or such it could be done using an opt-in kind of situation. If you wanted to include devs then you could say such...

Of course, if it is one of those..."what is the best emulation.." types of threads...all bets are off...

I agree. It goes against the spirit of any social media that you exclude a particular community, it also creates a boatload of work for the mods to enforce and you will have situations where devs (well OK, one probably just one dev) revert back to being "just a sound designer with no formal ties" just for the purposes of doing more promotion.

The vast majority of devs stay out or provide useful opinions. There are just a few that have decided to go the other way and an even smaller number who throw their dolly out of the pram when you suggest that they might like to rein it in a bit (like the classic "you're muted" I got from one until I pointed out that, up to that point, I'd bought everything they sold - oddly enough, I haven't bought much off them since).

Making rules to address a very small minority doesn't sound like a great idea. Perhaps a quiet word from a friend might help out the ones who are poisoning their own reputation and bring the temperature down a little.

+1

KVR doesn't need more rules. Nor does it need more segregation or over-reactions.

But the poisoning IS happening. Some people just don't know when they're being helped.
Last edited by Sendy on Thu Aug 23, 2012 4:11 am; edited 1 time in total

Sorry but ain't that solution a little bit too obvious and simple for KVR?

Just wonder

What, having an open forum where its presumed some of the members aren't allowed to contribute? Seems to go a bit against the ethos of KVR; having users and developers in close proximity.

The other way round, maybe - you can easily specify you want users opinions...

The rationale for me suggesting making it default-deny is that many (the majority?) of the people who ask these sort of questions are newcomers who wont know if someone is a developer and not an 'ordinary' user.

There's a different solution to that aspect of it, of course, but I can imagine it would be too much work for Ben to be interested (ie making developer ties explicit in the side-of-post profile.)

Who speaks of "allowing" members? As far as I get WR's post it was about stating your wishes for the thread and the devs to respect them. Unless you suggest that the term "made to respect" means "by force"? Thats not how I read it but let WR clarify.

I read it the other way round, tbh. Theres a presumption that devs won't get involved unless invited to. Which would just add another layer of complexity to the mods jobs. Maybe pms from mods occassionally if thiings are seen to be getting out of hand

If this refers to me, then I'll only reformulate it again : Someone stated I was a Xils employee.

I'm not.

I collaborate with Xils, from sound design, as you stated it, to creating specific modules, and also GUI and UI concepts, amongst other things.

I'm also helping Xils on certain forums for informative/promotional purposes, and to answer users, or potential users, questions. I'm doing this on my free time., and I have the autorisation from Xils staff to say "we".

There is no intention to "further promote" Xils-Lab by saying this, and tbh I just cant see how it could be so. ;shrug: Simple truth is that I find it a bit annoying to have to repeat the same things twice in two days.

If however this was the price to pay for clarity, it would probably be worth the effort, but, honnestly, I doubt it will have this effect.

Fwiw,

LtZ
Last edited by Lotuzia on Thu Aug 23, 2012 5:25 am; edited 1 time in total

in Ernest, i don't want to have him back (and his 'daughter' neither wieder). hopefully i'm cured from this pic addiction.

Well, most often it will be mentioned in the signature.