why wont you post the results about your findings.....
you're not being logical at all

 

no avenger made a post about a plugin discrediting it without any evidence, while olymoon comes to defend his friend. this is the rules?

 

olymoon this is what your job is as a mod.. for real?

 

btw... the thread would defo have more posts about the original post of he simply had provided proof of his findings

 

olymoon took every single nasty vote against no avenger. lets see you keep this same energy for other member

 

It is a snake oil if you claim something but its not even remotely close to something you claim.

After all, snake oil is not mean you have a bad product, but it can be considered as like you're scamming people.

But in this case, AO is really a terrible product in so many areas, which are very hard to let them win without them to put an effort of drastic changes in their decisive action to improve first. Maybe they just do it for the easy money, who knows.

To me, I won't invest in a company who not even show a fight for their own product in developing for greatness.

But hey, if they rock your boat, keep rocking babe. Nobody can tell you nasty if you like nasty stuff.

 

Last edited: Nov 14, 2019

The rules say "When a member violates our rules, moderator will increase that member's warning level, which maximum level is 5 points."

Not happened. The rules are not an argument here. What happened was that a long time member complained about a subjective rating and therefore it was censored. Can someone tell me where the validation for censoring is stated in the rules?


That's what happened. Nothing else. If you guys try to count peas you should do it consequently.

 

Last edited: Nov 14, 2019

It seems like you guys try to avoid my main point since three posts.

And of course the relevant thing is the consequence. I've never stated anything about what he has to do with his rating options.

I've just criticised the consequence.

 

Last edited: Nov 14, 2019

No you didn't say it's crap,you say it's snake oil.It's not my fantasy,it's yours my friend.

Of course there isn't any "rule that demands any evidence for this",of couse you can freely despise anyboby,but you may also present your arguments to do that.

 

he and many other think he had good reason to vote nasty....
just sayin...
---
while this is puplic forum puplic thread not everyone knows youre previous tests , maybe just post the results pictures

 

That's a big difference -IMHO- betwwen rating "dislike" a post and creating a thread about a developer,a plugin,or somebody to say it's snake oil and without any eveidence.
For your information I am not crying mate,and I don't use these AO plugins.

So if I get your point guys you must justify a negative rating but you don't have to justify anything when opening a thread and publicly saying a plugin is crap or snake oil.Ok you said all.

 

Last edited: Nov 14, 2019

@No Avenger What he can do in the context of "what he's able to do" or "what he feels" and what he has to do or should do in terms of the rules are two different things. (Never forget the context)

And what he can do and what he did was stating his opinion. And his opinion was and still is censored unfortunately.

You still try to count peas inconsequently.

 

Last edited: Nov 14, 2019

And IMHO in both cases people are just emiting opinions. They don't have to justify anything, the rule regarding "justifiying" rating is vain, opinions are like a...holes, we all have one on about anything it doesn't mean they are "informed" (fantasy of the "rational" man).
It's audio processing mate not science, if it were science we would all use the same tools, all have the same pseudo "sciency" result when we make a mix or a master. But it's not and we don't. The fact that there are analysis tools do not make audio processing a science nor do they allow us to "objectivily" evaluate a plugin or a daw. At the end of the day we all have different mixes or masters because we all make subjective decisions or choices of plugins at one point or another based on our pure taste or our subjective experience. Period.
IMHO of course. It's all subjective in the end.

 

You are changing the facts, this member rated as nasty a comment, when asked to explain, his answer was "nah" that's the only reason why I took off the nasty rating .
But I didn't apply the rules completely and didn't warned him because other wise he would have been automatically banned as he already accumulate 4 warning points.