You guys, that's a very poetic way to describe a phenomenon that's way too common on the internet: gatekeeping.Timmy Crowne wrote: ↑02 Sep 2019You're right, I stopped short of that one. That would be a much deeper and darker motivation: the desire to intentionally keep parts of Reason arcane and unintuitive, purely to secure one's own place of authority on the subject. In that case, I would analogize User 2 not to a regent, but to a self-appointed high priest: 'Don't ask for progress; only through our teachings can you grow.'Raveshaper wrote: ↑02 Sep 2019You forgot an option.
d: a blind and deaf hegemony of User 2's ego that gleefully stomps around rejoicing with intoxication over hearing its own bellowing voice, echoing endlessly within a shrinking enclave of increasingly esoteric and fruitless knowledge. User 1 risks this empire of self appointed knighthood and the threat of identity crisis reverberates in the recesses of the regent's mind.
To someone with that perspective, User 1's little feature-request would amount to heresy, and thus would warrant a visceral reaction. I might be naive, but I sincerely hope that's not true of most of us here.
EDIT: 2 more replies and we're at 1000!
Preserving the pecking order and the status quo. We've seen that behavior in regards to Players "It's just too easy to make music this way". You see it everyday in synth forums "Behringer is stealing and devaluing my precious old hardware". So yes, no offense but it is naive to believe that it doesn't happen
Here's a fictional user with a fictional train of thoughts: "I'm already invested in DAW X and can do Y and Z. I spent money on it. I don't want other people to be able to do it in Reason natively. That would lower my perceived level in the skill hierarchy and the purchases I made in the past."