Vintage Mode Marketing Discussion continues....

JAH wrote:I gave my opinion without attacking or insulting anyone. But because I disagree it is BS? Sounds like that is your usual BS when I don't agree. Then take into account what I am actually agreeing or disagreeing about.

It is not your opinions, it is the way you try to take control of every thread you post in, to try and steer threads in directions that you think they should go in, within relentless circular debates and arguments.

You are telling us that no one is interested, that we should not be talking about it because you are not interested, and you try to derail the thread by debating every single minute unrelated point.

This is not just your opinion about the Vintage Mode Marketing, it is telling us we can and can't do, what we can and can't discuss, what the MPC Software is and isn't, etc., etc.

JAH wrote:I make no claim what the Ren is or isn't. I simply said I was never confused about the marketing pointing to Dan's video. What mature person is going to attack another because they didn't understand what someone else understood?

You make claims about what it is and isn't all the time, based on your narrow experience and limited intellect.

Who is attacking who, based on not understanding what someone else understands?

Sigh.

Would be nice to have some mature discussion here. Make a point, move on unless you have something additional to add that continues this discussion maturely.

Jah, I believe you made your point on page 1 of this topic yet you seem to have repeated and repeated this point continually just because people disagree with you. Even after claiming, quite sensibly IMO, that you were 'falling back on this one' as you could see where it was going.

I simply said I was never confused about the marketing pointing to Dan's video. What mature person of sound mind and body is going to attack another because they didn't understand what someone else understood?

There is no 'simply' about it. If so, you would have just said it once and left it at that. Point made.

Equally others are doing the same because they cannot stand that you refuse to hold the same opinion as them. So now we have 7 pages of people bickering.

All of you - once you've made your point, just accept that some people may disagree. Otherwise it's not a discussion, it's a battle to ram your opinion down people's throats. If you want to coexist on a discussion forum, you have to accept that some people will hold different opinion's to you. I am talking to everyone here. Resorting to name calling, or belittling people because they don't own a Ren, or they haven't proven that they make music is not my definition of a mature discussion.

If you feel someone is clearly not willing to actually contribute positively to a discussion, just ignore them and lo and behold the discussion moves on and their comment suddenly seems insignificant.

So I would like a line drawn under this aspect of the discussion - some people feel the marketing is confusing, a couple of you don't. I think that's clear and I doubt there's much more that can be said on that subject.

JAH wrote:The consenus is that Akai's marketing is misleading. And that is telling. What is also telling is that most of you guys responding don't own these products and spend every minute in this section of the forum usually saying something negative.

There you go again, what business of yours is it if anyone owns these products or not.

You are using that to try and shutdown conversation, suggesting that only people that own these products should be allowed to take part in the forum.

JAH wrote:Of course you will deflect this and claim its not relevant.

How exactly is it relevant?

JAH wrote:Also note that the majority of Ren/Studio users in the forums are not participating in this thread....I should follow their lead.

Yes, you really should, PLEASE do!

You are not interested in what is being discussed here, you have made your point that you do not think it is deceptive marketing, you do not have to participate further in this thread.

Especially if you are just doing so to derail and shutdown the thread, rather than actually wanting to discuss the topic.

MPC-Tutor wrote:Equally others are doing the same because they cannot stand that you refuse to hold the same opinion as them.

No, you are wrong.

We do not care that he refuses to hold the same opinion as us, we care that he actively tries to derail and shutdown conversation when he refuses to hold the same opinion as us.

JAH wrote:All of you - once you've made your point, just accept that some people may disagree. Otherwise it's not a discussion, it's a battle to ram your opinion down people's throats.

No, it is a battle to prevent Jerome's opinions being rammed down our throats, and to stop being prevented by him from discussing topics that he does not agree with.

MPC-Tutor wrote:Sigh.

Would be nice to have some mature discussion here.

I returned to the discussion as it appeared, at least one person, didn't see the video with Dan clearing it up. The going back-n-forth was just a harmless discussion, debate until it turned to an obvious attack and then insult...back on page 2.

I agree with Simon it is not equivalent. This thread is more about intelligent observation and the questions that it leads to concerning this feature and it's description in the marketing.

It has nothing to do with his opinion differing. It's that every other observation in the thread on a 10:1 ratio at minimum is based on a variety of valid observations whereas his opinion is "Dan said it's what the box says but not quite...but it's still accurately described overall." Wait...what...?

All anybody wants is more elaboration. And if he believes that it's "paranoid" or unreasonable that the a company can prove it's box blurbs, well what can really be said...

Yeah Jerome play the victim card.

Most of this thread is a mature discussion, but every three posts we had to reiterate to Jerome the reasons why the questions are being posed. (not that it isn't dead obvious).

Metatron72 wrote:
Most of this thread is a mature discussion, but every three posts we had to reiterate to Jerome the reasons why the questions are being posed. (not that it isn't dead obvious).

Every other post was an insult, name calling, etc. That isn't mature.

DELETED - wasting my breath

Actually, looking at the last few posts, this topic is done.