Audiobus: Use your music apps together.

What is Audiobus?Audiobus is an award-winning music app for iPhone and iPad which lets you use your other music apps together. Chain effects on your favourite synth, run the output of apps or Audio Units into an app like GarageBand or Loopy, or select a different audio interface output for each app. Route MIDI between apps — drive a synth from a MIDI sequencer, or add an arpeggiator to your MIDI keyboard — or sync with your external MIDI gear. And control your entire setup from a MIDI controller.

Download on the App Store

Audiobus is the app that makes the rest of your setup better.

Why do some ABF threads get deleted?

24

Comments

  • edited August 2019

    @gusgranite... so it seemed to me. However, in this case you could not delete the user's posts without eliminating the title and any references to him. So I guess extrapolation of the principle was utilized. Very Talmudic!

  • @gusgranite said:
    It sounds like the ability to delete a users posts on request rather than the whole thread is the compromise then?

    good call if possible.

  • edited August 2019

    @dendy said:

    @gusgranite said:
    @dendy I noticed one of Win Conway’s threads got deleted on the NS2 forum as well. Win made some really great technical points in that thread that in my view should not have been deleted from public view.

    Maybe this thread will be deleted also and no one will ever know that I chose to share a public opinion on this matter... 😉

    On his request and i was trying really hard to convice him to stay and to not delete all hist posts (because i totally agree with what you wrote). I wanted to publish some statement about that to avoid speculations but he didn't wanted so i accepted it. I also wrote him that anytime he decides to return he is welcome from my side (which is totally true)

    There is other fact which maybe not everybody is aware - at least in EU based on GDPR law, if user asks deleting all his posts, forum owner must do it.

    AFAIK the last this law is more complex. There's no law that a website has directly to comply with it after a request. Because there's also a question of public interest that should be checked. Though in practice most websites comply with it instantly. This law is heavily misused by serial offenders and dirty politicians.

  • People. Threads are not generally being deleted.

    The thread in question started by speculating that an honest developer was being deceptive.

    Its title was (intentionally or not) replete with that suggestion.

    I imagine it was not fun for pagefall to see that topic title listed on the front page when he visited the forum.

    I don't see any benefit to the community to preserve every single word anyone has ever posted--especially when the vehicle for those words was a discussion that started with an implied suggestion of bad faith by a member in good standing

    If OP thought it was better to delete the topic than re-title it, so be it.

  • @greengrocer, very interesting. I have to think, in this case, nothing so earthshaking re public interest was lost as opposed as in the case of negative proclamations of a public figure.... as in Twitter's announcement recently. It is of the public's interest if it is by or about a public figure?

  • @gusgranite said:
    It sounds like the ability to delete a users posts on request rather than the whole thread is the compromise then?

    But then there are quotes. I don’t think that can be removed.

    Best to just close the forum.

  • @dendy tangent but it appears Win asked for his account and content to be deleted, not the thread.

    @espiegel123 I had noticed two threads in recent weeks so enough to warrant asking the question.

    Thanks for the discussion everyone! Very heathy! 🙂

  • edited August 2019

    I'm not trying to be an antagonist here...

    But what about ExAsperis99's right for his (excellent) reply to remain for all posterity. And others too.

    If we delete threads at the request of the OP, every reply that was written in good faith is lost too.

    These replies help define the good character and reputations, not only of the poster, but of the forum itself.

    I'd rather visit a forum with a sexist post that was succinctly defeated by forum elders, than a forum that was conspicuously absent of all friction or ugliness.

  • edited August 2019

    @gusgranite said:
    @dendy tangent but it appears Win asked for his account and content to be deleted, not the thread.

    simply everything, posts, comments ..

  • @tk32 said:
    I'm not trying to be an antagonist here...

    But what about ExAsperis99's right for his (excellent) reply to remain for all posterity. And others too.

    I don’t think people have a right to be not forgotten if we are just talking legal mumbo jumbo.

    If we delete threads at the request of the OP, every reply that was written in good faith is lost too.

    Dust...

  • @tk32

    But yah I would hate to say something, regret it and have it hanging over my head far moreso than ‘awww, the world won’t know that great thing I said’. Especially given that times change and the degrees of openness that things can be talked about change. The ways things are going, in five years from now who knows what the landscape looks like.

  • @dendy said:

    @gusgranite said:
    @dendy tangent but it appears Win asked for his account and content to be deleted, not the thread.

    simply everything, posts, comments ..

    ...but was his removal request in response to seeing the thread deleted??

  • "Change what you're saying, don't change what you said"
    -- A Daisy through concrete - Eels

  • edited August 2019

    @tk32 said:
    ...but was his removal request in response to seeing the thread deleted??

    No. Just locked because it ended with pointless flamewar, that was reason. One of our admins decided it's good idea to lock that old thread to not continue with flame and Win get pissed off, and made decision to leave.

    After that thread got locked, i reopened new thread for that initial request which started that other locked thread, to have still room for constructive discussion about that feature.

  • edited August 2019

    As much as I enjoyed and appreciated @ExAsperis99 's comments, this is a pretty small world here. I doubt much will be excavated by those to come as sociological sweetmeats for their PhD theses on controversial issues. And if that is not the case let the conversation begin anew. If it is that important all the usual suspects will weigh in again,no?

    Here, I will start.. maybe that never to be mentioned again was more about gender appropriation than sexism? I mean, Victoria's Secret, right? Hey maybe the Apple scam thread and this one could merge?

    And let me say (to myself), let us not take ourselves too seriously. I mean I spend hours and hours tapping on a piece of glass. 21st century Ouija!

  • I'm unclear exactly as to who deleted the thread and whose decision it was.
    @LinearLineman. Any intel?

    I see both sides. @tk32 Makes a very strong case that we wouldn't want a form that is "conspicuously absent of all friction." (And he said a nice thing about me. So thanks.)

    But also the OP — whose handle? honestly? can't remember — may have been embarrassed that his offhanded comment revealed something ugly that he no longer stood by. Which could be seen as progress and worthy of having the record sealed.

  • Well, @ExAsperis99, as I said, I alerted @Michael about the OP's request. Enigmatic as always!

  • @LinearLineman said:
    @greengrocer, very interesting. I have to think, in this case, nothing so earthshaking re public interest was lost as opposed as in the case of negative proclamations of a public figure.... as in Twitter's announcement recently. It is of the public's interest if it is by or about a public figure?

    AFAIK the intend of this EU law was about "the right to be forgotten" and was specifically meant for Google. Sounds reasonable. You did something stupid and don't want it to popup in every search people do when they type your name. But it seemed to be especially used by people to cover their tracks of wrongdoings, conjobs, criminal pasts, etc. so they could easily proceed again with their wrongdoings, etc.
    Also in this law public interest is not 1:1 linked public figures and is/ was especially meant to protect ordinary people. But as with a lot of laws that meant to be good this had side effects that the makers didn't foresee.

    That said, on ABF nearly everyone uses nicks so as long as they are not traceable on the site itself to the full identity there would be imo no reason to delete. In any case there would be no legal liability (EU law) for it.

  • @greengrocer, thanks for the clarification. Most of us have our email addresses in our profiles... I think. Maybe time to delete mine. I feel a hankering to be ornery.

  • @LinearLineman said:
    Well, @ExAsperis99, as I said, I alerted @Michael about the OP's request. Enigmatic as always!

    Ah, I missed that. Thank you.

  • Ignore user

    Ignore thread

    Ignore forum...

    buttons in that order please.

  • @supadom ... Ignore Wife... Ignore Life.

  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • @JohnnyGoodyear said:
    I don't often find these matters vexatious but when I do I like to listen to a rabbit chewing watermelon. I find it calms me down some.

    <3

    Yes! Imagine a world of more rabbit-chewing-watermelon and less men mansplaining sexism to other men.

    You can say I’m a dreamer,
    But I’m not the only one..

  • @Lady_App_titude said:

    @JohnnyGoodyear said:
    I don't often find these matters vexatious but when I do I like to listen to a rabbit chewing watermelon. I find it calms me down some.

    <3

    Yes! Imagine a world of more rabbit-chewing-watermelon and less men mansplaining sexism to other men.

    You can say I’m a dreamer,
    But I’m not the only one..

    NO ONE WINS!

  • edited August 2019

    @greengrocer said:

    @LinearLineman said:
    @greengrocer, very interesting. I have to think, in this case, nothing so earthshaking re public interest was lost as opposed as in the case of negative proclamations of a public figure.... as in Twitter's announcement recently. It is of the public's interest if it is by or about a public figure?

    AFAIK the intend of this EU law was about "the right to be forgotten" and was specifically meant for Google. Sounds reasonable. You did something stupid and don't want it to popup in every search people do when they type your name. But it seemed to be especially used by people to cover their tracks of wrongdoings, conjobs, criminal pasts, etc. so they could easily proceed again with their wrongdoings, etc.
    Also in this law public interest is not 1:1 linked public figures and is/ was especially meant to protect ordinary people. But as with a lot of laws that meant to be good this had side effects that the makers didn't foresee.

    That said, on ABF nearly everyone uses nicks so as long as they are not traceable on the site itself to the full identity there would be imo no reason to delete. In any case there would be no legal liability (EU law) for it.

    Totally useless this deleting of threads. It's more a kind of symbolic action. The internet remembers everything.

    First there is Google cache (for a limited period). If you want to read the specific thread just type the name of the specific thread and select Google cache.

    Second archive.org has already made a copy of the original page but they are slow and it can take a while before it is in their search

    And than there's quite a few sites that if something's complete deleted from Google they have it still available. I won't go into detail here, but they are easily to find. They are amongst others favorites of people that want to smear others for things they said years ago.

    btw I fully respect the right to be forgotten, but everyone should know that the internet forgets nothing. I hope that more people just will forgive people that made mistakes. Only idiotics make cases of things people said 10 years ago and proven that they change their lives. Unfortunately it seems these idiots seem to get more and more power.

  • @ExAsperis99 said:

    NO ONE WINS!

    Not even the rabbit? That watermelon looks mighty tasty..

  • There are people behind these apps we love or hate. Most of those people encourage feedback and genuine questions.

    What happened yesterday was another kettle of fish!

  • the self-reflective nature of my ipad screen, means that every message i type, i see as ultimately to my self

    every post an opportunity to consider that that has caught my attention, an opportunity to focus my thinking and hone my expression

    now this is all possible without actually posting, but there is something about the sharing that forces me to really feel it, really own it

    for me, in the search for growth and understanding, i see no question taboo, no thought beyond the pale - without this questioning how are we to learn?

  • @simonnowis said:
    the self-reflective nature of my ipad screen, means that every message i type, i see as ultimately to my self

    every post an opportunity to consider that that has caught my attention, an opportunity to focus my thinking and hone my expression

    now this is all possible without actually posting, but there is something about the sharing that forces me to really feel it, really own it

    for me, in the search for growth and understanding, i see no question taboo, no thought beyond the pale - without this questioning how are we to learn?

    Quite a sorrowful piece of music that 😢

Sign In or Register to comment.