bitwig 2 is here

[.jon]

Look, we got your point pages ago do really want to carry on with this crusade? The same goes for all the other aurgements that lead to name calling and finget pointing which by the way I was pointing out in that reply.

It's about time to get back to the topic at hand, Bitwig 2.

You're the one going on about your tired little crusade, unless you have something to say about the topic, why even post?

[Daags]

.jon, regarding this topic of censorhip you completely ignored my response to you. You're telling CTSTump that if he has nothing to say on this (sub-)topic, he shouldn't be posting... yet if he said something on the topic, directly to you, there's a good chance you'd ignore him as you ignored me. If you're going to bust his balls, from this angle, you should at least be engaging people on this topic who are taking the time to respond to you directly on this very topic. Otherwise, continue to pick & choose whose arguments - directed explicitly to you - you acknowledge, but CTStump should likewise pick & choose what he posts about.

Anyway as I asked you then, are you privvy to all instances of censorship that have taken place there ? because you persistently speak on this topic in absolute terms like you have. And I doubt that you're privvy to all bannings/deletions/etc. you can only speak on what you yourself have seen, so you should probably qualify your statements accordingly.

I have seen with my own eyes censorship that was not in the slightest bit warranted, and in breach of no rules unless - as I queried earlier - there is some Bitwig sub-forum specific rule about not being irate with Bitwig. I have no reason to dispute that there have been other instances of guys evading bans, coming back even more irate than when they were when banned in the first place.

Your impression of David's situation is your own ('spamming', a word too easily abused at a time when people have a lot to say, 'trolling' ...also quite subjective. Better to specify exactly what you think he did out of the way, and let people make their own judgement on whether his ban was warranted. He gave his version of what happened, so there's plenty there - in terms of facts - for you to refute if you think he's lying or some such). I don't share your impression, but of course you are entitled to it... and when I see how you engage with CTStump, whose contributions we can all see in the last few pages, it really makes me wonder about your representations of David too.


ultimately, nobody seems to be in any disagreement about whether an 'independent' Bitwig thread should exist here in the 'hosts' forum.

[.jon]

This narrative that evil Bitwig are banning everyone who expresses their negative opinions and criticisms about BWS 2 is just bullshit, that's all.

And what David did:

Blocked for not stopping to constantly spam the release candidate thread with offtopic postings after being warned several times by moderation.

The offtopic content was FR list, which is against their forum rules viewtopic.php?f=259&t=420129. He refused to respect the rules, repeatedly, and got exactly what was coming.

You know, here's how they actually deal with trolls, for user "popskull" on his 2863th rant:

@popskull: Pretty please, i asked you before to stop trolling other threads. You're free to express your views on topic like everyone else, but if you continue the offtopic trolling it will get you blocked.

It's honestly just normal moderation, there's no illuminati or trying to shovel anything under the carpet. Best just to accept, stop being hysterical and move on. Even though pretty much everything about their clusterfuck has already been said.

[David Boura]

@Daags:
Don't waste your time, the guy has zero credibility attacking me while he said himself hasn't read my "problematic" posts.
At best, even when he "gently" helps someone on the forum, it does it with some harsh and patronizing style. No drama.

See how he now goes into conspiration theories stuff

[Hink]

I dont want to lock the thread...to make it clear I banned one sockpuppet because when I checked on him more than one account came back to him. It was quite clear that he was a sockpuppet. However in the case of the one that it seems people want to keep going on about when I looked up his info no such evidence was present, perhaps another mod will be better at reading what is available and will ban him. If I banned him I would only be acting on my feelings or acting on public pressure, I am not comfortable with either.

Now please get back on topic

[memyselfandus]

Anyone helping with the beta?

[David Boura]

I dont want to lock the thread...to make it clear I banned one sockpuppet because when I checked on him more than one account came back to him. It was quite clear that he was a sockpuppet. However in the case of the one that it seems people want to keep going on about when I looked up his info no such evidence was present, perhaps another mod will be better at reading what is available and will ban him. If I banned him I would only be acting on my feelings or acting on public pressure, I am not comfortable with either.

Now please get back on topic

Am i "the one"?

If so feel free to erase my account, i've said what i had to say. I just had to fight against arbitrary moderation to express my opinion.
Please remove the personal attacks on me, and my yet gentle answers to them from your judgment about me or my behavior.

As i said, i don't care this forum since this is not a fair place.

I'll keep answering childish comments directed to me, the best way i can, if you don't mind.

[SLiC]

Anyone helping with the beta?

From what I have read it is still Alpha. Some of the Alpha testers have posted that it is pretty stable.
Beta invites haven't gone out yet the joe public ASAIK

[memyselfandus]

Cool! I'm excited to see what stuff they add in the next few months.

[SLiC]

Yup- As a eurorack user the CV out stuff looks interesting, there is already the ES-8 but also rumours of other USB- CV output devices for use with software like Reactor and BWS

[memyselfandus]

Nice!

[woodsdenis]

If they just rolled back on the daft 12 month license thing and just committed like a Steinberg to release significant yearly point and full updates ( going on the assumption according to BW that they have all of these great features ready to roll, nobody minds waiting a year for something significant ) then this whole PR nightmare would subside. Or use a S1/Reason model whatever, why as a software company they can't see this is a subscription model by another name is beyond me.

They are trying to reinvent a pricing structure to something that is really obviously defective for the users.

I don't mind paying for a major upgrade at all going on the assumption, and let's face it BW past track record is a bit shaky, that it will be supported until its relatively bug free.

[Daags]

I dont want to lock the thread...to make it clear I banned one sockpuppet because when I checked on him more than one account came back to him. It was quite clear that he was a sockpuppet. However in the case of the one that it seems people want to keep going on about when I looked up his info no such evidence was present, perhaps another mod will be better at reading what is available and will ban him. If I banned him I would only be acting on my feelings or acting on public pressure, I am not comfortable with either.

Now please get back on topic

Hey Hink, agreed about getting back on topic ... it's an especially pointless detour since we're all in total agreement about wanting a thread here in the hosts forum anyway.

just an FYI though, what we're discussing here is not at all about that other sock-puppet (who's here as a bitwig apologist).

Over in the bitwig forum, it appears there were as an instance of some customer who was initially banned for expressing his dissatisfaction, but subsequently banned for evading the initial ban. He's actually the sockpuppet you banned here in this thread. So maybe, perhaps in the general discussion of censorship, when sock-puppets are mentioned, you might be thinking we're talking about that as-yet-not-banned sock-puppet ... we're not. whoever that guy is, it's highly unlikely that he's evading a ban (though that makes his sock-puppetry no less against the rules, as far as I understand them)... more likely he's just upset that he's completely ineffectual in trying to debate his POV and wants to try again with a different nickname. at any rate, he's harmless, and his re-posting of official Bitwig announcement details hasn't been achieving much, either in terms of furthering his argument or disrupting the thread. I guess he's just as ineffectual as a sock-puppet as he is with his actual username ... how sad.

anyway, back to Bitwig.

Am i "the one"?

nope.

Anyone helping with the beta?

existing licensees get to apply for the beta, but the beta announcement I read didn't make it 100% clear if that meant anyone who applied got the beta, by virtue of being a licensee, or if there would still be a selection process beyond just owning a license.

as far as I know, the beta is coming in about 2 weeks.
will be interesting to see what people think. it might go some way to alleviating current misigivings if beta testers are raving about features or what not.

[Daags]

Yup- As a eurorack user the CV out stuff looks interesting, there is already the ES-8 but also rumours of other USB- CV output devices for use with software like Reactor and BWS

also curious about the CV stuff, but with Expert Sleepers 'Silent Way' available to use with all VST hosts, it's not a 'killer feature' that is going to lure me into wearing the gimp suit I'd be expected to wear when signing up to this new 12-month-subscription-fees-for-bug-fixes scheme of theirs. Nevertheless, I'll be keeping tabs on this feature out of curiosity and of course relevance to my hardware setup.

[Daags]

If they just rolled back on the daft 12 month license thing and just committed like a Steinberg to release significant yearly point and full updates ( going on the assumption according to BW that they have all of these great features ready to roll, nobody minds waiting a year for something significant ) then this whole PR nightmare would subside. Or use a S1/Reason model whatever, why as a software company they can't see this is a subscription model by another name is beyond me.

They are trying to reinvent a pricing structure to something that is really obviously defective for the users.

I don't mind paying for a major upgrade at all going on the assumption, and let's face it BW past track record is a bit shaky, that it will be supported until its relatively bug free.

well, it depends on why you think they've proposed this daft scheme.
do you think they're in a solid financial position, but they're looking to cash in ?
or
do you think they're in a desperate financial position, and this is what they think is the best way to keep moving forward ?

a roll back is more likely if you believe the former. if you believe the latter, like me, it seems less likely. I'll be very surprised, but also very happy, if they roll back on what is the crux of the issue: they need to charge the userbase, yearly, to bugfix and stabilise the program. whatever tweaks or adjustments they might make to the new scheme, i don't think that crux will change. if they can tweak that crux, and make assurances that whatever version you buy they will dutifully bugfix and make stable as per normal commercial software expectations, well ... they may as well scrap the whole idea altogether. Which I'd love to see, but I'm skeptical they can.

would love to be wrong.

btw, did you check that sweetwater sales ranking link I posted ? did you see just how low, out of like 160+ DAW products (includes upgrades, crossgrades, etc) that Bitwig scores ? .... they need more money and more marketshare. with this scheme, they're clearly reaching for money .... but this can't be good for marketshare, and from what appears to be an already weak position, they're going to slip even further down those sales rankings.

imo, ymmv.