Zampled gone down

Need some fresh sounds? Want to show off your sound design skills? Here's the place!
User avatar
JiggeryPokery
Posts: 1093
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 08 Jul 2019

Marco Raaphorst wrote:
08 Jul 2019

I thought the Propellerhead has never said there was a copyright claim concerning Softphonics.
OK, guys, can we please put this one to bed?

Yes, you're right in the sense that indeed they didn't say that, precisely, but if you acutely read the official red-topped post you're likely refering and parse the high levels of lawyer-approved radioactive disingenuity swamping every other word, you'll also be quite aware he did not say or even imply at any stage "we've not been informed of any issues". He merely states they hadn't received an actual copyright claim, and even then, that's only applicable at the time of writing that post. Which is a different thing entirely to suggesting Softphonics were legit. He did not say that, or even I think mention him by name or business. You have to read between the lines and work out what hasn't been said, that's often as important as what is.

"His disappearance can also be based on other reasons. I have seen many developers give up because of all sorts of reasons, illness, lack of money, tiredness etc."

Yes, but that's not fundamentally true in his case: it's clear many, perhaps all, of his samples were absolutely stolen—aside from the fact that at no time did Skelton even try to protest that "this is not true" and offer any contrary evidence, which any genuine sample-maker would do—and despite having been remarkably quite fit enough to be active on social media in the proceeding days and putting together a new device with allegedly even more ripped samples (chorale stuff, I was told) at the time somehow it suddenly became all about him being to ill to continue, yet he still managed to put out a bizarre non-response video. He could therefore have just as easily put out a video defending himself and proving the doubters wrong. He didn't. But that's the power of gaslighting and trying to put the focus on those being critical; it's the "Fake News" playbook 101, sadly. It's bullshit and you've fallen into his trap. That was his intent with that video. FUD. But no. He stole samples. He got caught. Then he tried blamed those that caught him (afaik according to my sources it wasn't any of the names he mentioned; phasys definitely leaked it, though I'm fairly sure he wasn't the video maker).

In the shitstorm he decided to just do a runner and nuke everything, and has probably just started shilling pirated crap on ebay. His products are not missed: remember, this was the guy who use the latest IDT at the time to release with a new metering feature, to create a free stereo-in and stereo-display meter ... that, er, :lol: ... only actually displayed in mono. :roll:

So please stop making excuses for him, Marco, and I understand if you try to see the best in people before the worst: but look, if they were legit he'd have quite easily been able to prove it and they'd still be in the shop. I'm personally convinced enough to feel Zampled are dodgy, but not enough I'd convict them on it. Skelton's was proved. Lock/Stock/Barrel. The moment he pulled them from the shop and then went dark, other than a nasty troll video attacking people, he effectively admitted it.

User avatar
Marco Raaphorst
Posts: 2462
Joined: 22 Jan 2015
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands

Post 08 Jul 2019

The Softphonics thing feels strange and it's deleted from https://www.propellerheads.com/shop/brands/ But I never heard anything about this from the Props which is also not okay. If there was a copyright conflict issue the Props should clarify or else we end up speculating about it.

I'v done patches for Softphonics, the AmplifiRE. But because of an old bug the patches are way too loud. I told the programmer but he did included those patches under my companies name Melodiefabriek. Those patches are not correct so I asked him to delete them from the package or fix the output issue. He never responded. I felt bad about this. But this product is now deleted from the Props shop. It was not a bad product I should say and not a rip off.
Marco Raaphorst

maker of fancy intervallic things
https://melodiefabriek.com

User avatar
Magnus
Posts: 139
Joined: 03 Jul 2018

Post 09 Jul 2019

JiggeryPokery wrote:
08 Jul 2019
Marco Raaphorst wrote:
08 Jul 2019

I thought the Propellerhead has never said there was a copyright claim concerning Softphonics.
I'm personally convinced enough to feel Zampled are dodgy, but not enough I'd convict them on it. Skelton's was proved. Lock/Stock/Barrel. The moment he pulled them from the shop and then went dark, other than a nasty troll video attacking people, he effectively admitted it.
This is where I am now too, Zampled just feels dodgy the more I've picked it apart on a technical level and the more I look at the outside stuff (website expiry, marketing text, stock photo use, lack of information around the undertaking of the sampling itself) but as you rightly state we don't actually have any real proper proof that it is a fraudulent product.

User avatar
Marco Raaphorst
Posts: 2462
Joined: 22 Jan 2015
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands

Post 09 Jul 2019

JiggeryPokery wrote:
08 Jul 2019

I thought the Propellerhead has never said there was a copyright claim concerning Softphonics.
OK, guys, can we please put this one to bed?

Yes, you're right in the sense that indeed they didn't say that, precisely, but if you acutely read the official red-topped post you're likely refering and parse the high levels of lawyer-approved radioactive disingenuity swamping every other word, you'll also be quite aware he did not say or even imply at any stage "we've not been informed of any issues". He merely states they hadn't received an actual copyright claim, and even then, that's only applicable at the time of writing that post. Which is a different thing entirely to suggesting Softphonics were legit. He did not say that, or even I think mention him by name or business. You have to read between the lines and work out what hasn't been said, that's often as important as what is.

"His disappearance can also be based on other reasons. I have seen many developers give up because of all sorts of reasons, illness, lack of money, tiredness etc."

Yes, but that's not fundamentally true in his case: it's clear many, perhaps all, of his samples were absolutely stolen—aside from the fact that at no time did Skelton even try to protest that "this is not true" and offer any contrary evidence, which any genuine sample-maker would do—and despite having been remarkably quite fit enough to be active on social media in the proceeding days and putting together a new device with allegedly even more ripped samples (chorale stuff, I was told) at the time somehow it suddenly became all about him being to ill to continue, yet he still managed to put out a bizarre non-response video. He could therefore have just as easily put out a video defending himself and proving the doubters wrong. He didn't. But that's the power of gaslighting and trying to put the focus on those being critical; it's the "Fake News" playbook 101, sadly. It's bullshit and you've fallen into his trap. That was his intent with that video. FUD. But no. He stole samples. He got caught. Then he tried blamed those that caught him (afaik according to my sources it wasn't any of the names he mentioned; phasys definitely leaked it, though I'm fairly sure he wasn't the video maker).

In the shitstorm he decided to just do a runner and nuke everything, and has probably just started shilling pirated crap on ebay. His products are not missed: remember, this was the guy who use the latest IDT at the time to release with a new metering feature, to create a free stereo-in and stereo-display meter ... that, er, :lol: ... only actually displayed in mono. :roll:

So please stop making excuses for him, Marco, and I understand if you try to see the best in people before the worst: but look, if they were legit he'd have quite easily been able to prove it and they'd still be in the shop. I'm personally convinced enough to feel Zampled are dodgy, but not enough I'd convict them on it. Skelton's was proved. Lock/Stock/Barrel. The moment he pulled them from the shop and then went dark, other than a nasty troll video attacking people, he effectively admitted it.
I've already pointed this out: I want facts, not presumptions.
Marco Raaphorst

maker of fancy intervallic things
https://melodiefabriek.com

User avatar
Magnus
Posts: 139
Joined: 03 Jul 2018

Post 09 Jul 2019

Marco Raaphorst wrote:
09 Jul 2019
JiggeryPokery wrote:
08 Jul 2019


OK, guys, can we please put this one to bed?

Yes, you're right in the sense that indeed they didn't say that, precisely, but if you acutely read the official red-topped post you're likely refering and parse the high levels of lawyer-approved radioactive disingenuity swamping every other word, you'll also be quite aware he did not say or even imply at any stage "we've not been informed of any issues". He merely states they hadn't received an actual copyright claim, and even then, that's only applicable at the time of writing that post. Which is a different thing entirely to suggesting Softphonics were legit. He did not say that, or even I think mention him by name or business. You have to read between the lines and work out what hasn't been said, that's often as important as what is.

"His disappearance can also be based on other reasons. I have seen many developers give up because of all sorts of reasons, illness, lack of money, tiredness etc."

Yes, but that's not fundamentally true in his case: it's clear many, perhaps all, of his samples were absolutely stolen—aside from the fact that at no time did Skelton even try to protest that "this is not true" and offer any contrary evidence, which any genuine sample-maker would do—and despite having been remarkably quite fit enough to be active on social media in the proceeding days and putting together a new device with allegedly even more ripped samples (chorale stuff, I was told) at the time somehow it suddenly became all about him being to ill to continue, yet he still managed to put out a bizarre non-response video. He could therefore have just as easily put out a video defending himself and proving the doubters wrong. He didn't. But that's the power of gaslighting and trying to put the focus on those being critical; it's the "Fake News" playbook 101, sadly. It's bullshit and you've fallen into his trap. That was his intent with that video. FUD. But no. He stole samples. He got caught. Then he tried blamed those that caught him (afaik according to my sources it wasn't any of the names he mentioned; phasys definitely leaked it, though I'm fairly sure he wasn't the video maker).

In the shitstorm he decided to just do a runner and nuke everything, and has probably just started shilling pirated crap on ebay. His products are not missed: remember, this was the guy who use the latest IDT at the time to release with a new metering feature, to create a free stereo-in and stereo-display meter ... that, er, :lol: ... only actually displayed in mono. :roll:

So please stop making excuses for him, Marco, and I understand if you try to see the best in people before the worst: but look, if they were legit he'd have quite easily been able to prove it and they'd still be in the shop. I'm personally convinced enough to feel Zampled are dodgy, but not enough I'd convict them on it. Skelton's was proved. Lock/Stock/Barrel. The moment he pulled them from the shop and then went dark, other than a nasty troll video attacking people, he effectively admitted it.
I've already pointed this out: I want facts, not presumptions.
This video proves the Softphonic libraries were stolen:



Whilst we haven't got an equivalent for Zampled yet, the fact that their Euphonic Strings contains WAV files for different semitones that are just pitch shifted rather than unique samples per note is very weird. It makes makes no sense and points to the WAV files being carelessly ripped. Some files have phasing and other files have weird endings and strange editing discrepancies that make them seem like they've been hacked together. The identical samples at different chromatic pitches is the loudest alarm bell as these files add pointless unnecessary size to the ReFill, given NN-XT can map a single WAV to multiple notes chromatically.

The only logical conclusion to the sample library being in this state is that the authors did not know what they were doing when they used an automatic MIDI sampling tool to grab the sound of one or more existing VSTs that did not have chromatic samples for every semitone. This along with the other factors (website expiry, stock photo use, lack of information around the undertaking of the sampling itself) all add up to being a big giveaway that the WAV files contained within their product are stolen and not original work.

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 8622
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

Post 09 Jul 2019

Marco Raaphorst wrote:
09 Jul 2019
I've already pointed this out: I want facts, not presumptions.
The video Magnus posted above is good proof.

But if you're like me, you'll want to do the tests yourself. I did, and every single sample I compared was a perfect match to the NI library.

It won't take long to compare for yourself, unless you don't have the NI samples handy.
But at the least you should know the tests in that video have been 100% confirmed by myself and a few others I don't recall at the moment (should be in the original thread).
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
JiggeryPokery
Posts: 1093
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 09 Jul 2019

Marco Raaphorst wrote:
09 Jul 2019

I've already pointed this out: I want facts, not presumptions.
Well, at least that response proves there's one thing that definitely doesn't need to be presumed anymore.



User avatar
JiggeryPokery
Posts: 1093
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 09 Jul 2019

Magnus wrote:
09 Jul 2019

Whilst we haven't got an equivalent for Zampled yet, the fact that their Euphonic Strings contains WAV files for different semitones that are just pitch shifted rather than unique samples per note is very weird. It makes makes no sense and points to the WAV files being carelessly ripped. Some files have phasing and other files have weird endings and strange editing discrepancies that make them seem like they've been hacked together. The identical samples at different chromatic pitches is the loudest alarm bell as these files add pointless unnecessary size to the ReFill, given NN-XT can map a single WAV to multiple notes chromatically.

The only logical conclusion to the sample library being in this state is that the authors did not know what they were doing when they used an automatic MIDI sampling tool to grab the sound of one or more existing VSTs that did not have chromatic samples for every semitone. This along with the other factors (website expiry, stock photo use, lack of information around the undertaking of the sampling itself) all add up to being a big giveaway that the WAV files contained within their product are stolen and not original work.
This.

Once PH introduced VSTs, Skelton was screwed because it was inevitable that eventually someone with both his ReFill/RE products and subsequently aquiring Kontakt to use in Reason was going to notice, given that the percussion in particular does sound fairly specific. It was then easy to guess that he ripped more of NI Kontakt library so it was straightforward to locate the strings. He even tried to disguise some of his deception by often recording samples wet (no, no no, you don't that for any good reason).

There are a lot of string libraries, some going back to the 90s (Garritan, Gigastudio etc). Anyone who's got all of them and ton of patience could find it. But at this point it's clear Marco doesn't want understand facts, so I'd suggest giving up try to explain anything to him in a post-truth world.

Skelton talked to me a few days before the leak, and it was a weird as fuck conversation. He was talking about "trolls" and how his customers were "idiots" for not realising how easy sampling was.

After I saw the video, this comment made a ton more sense too:


Sampled ReFills are "less work".

Well, I've hand-sampled lot of a real instruments in my time and not once have I ever thought "easy! that wasn't much work at all", even as a joke.
Last edited by JiggeryPokery on 10 Jul 2019, edited 6 times in total.

User avatar
Loque
Posts: 7457
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

Post 09 Jul 2019

Sad...
:reason: 11, Win10 64Bit.

User avatar
diminished
Posts: 1682
Joined: 15 Dec 2018

Post 09 Jul 2019

JiggeryPokery wrote:
09 Jul 2019

Skelton talked to me a few days before the leak, and it was a weird as fuck conversation. He was talking about "trolls" and how his customers were "idiots" for not realising how easy sampling was.

After I saw the video, this comment made a ton more sense too:

messCapture.PNG


So there you have it. Sampled ReFills are "less work".

Well, I've hand-sampled lot of a real instruments in my time and not once have I ever thought "easy! that wasn't much work at all", even as a joke.
Since you have no problem with posting private conversations, could you post a screenshot of the "trolls" and "idiots" claims (and your response to that) too?
:reason: Most recent track: resentment (synthwave) || Others: on my YouTube channel •ᴗ•

User avatar
MrFigg
Posts: 4537
Joined: 20 Apr 2018

Post 09 Jul 2019

diminished wrote:
09 Jul 2019
JiggeryPokery wrote:
09 Jul 2019

Skelton talked to me a few days before the leak, and it was a weird as fuck conversation. He was talking about "trolls" and how his customers were "idiots" for not realising how easy sampling was.

After I saw the video, this comment made a ton more sense too:

messCapture.PNG


So there you have it. Sampled ReFills are "less work".

Well, I've hand-sampled lot of a real instruments in my time and not once have I ever thought "easy! that wasn't much work at all", even as a joke.
Since you have no problem with posting private conversations, could you post a screenshot of the "trolls" and "idiots" claims (and your response to that) too?
Personally I think that posting screenshots of private messages on a public forum is unacceptable behavior.

People, beware what you write to Jiggery-Pokery. Your conversation may end up being fired up on the internet.
丰2ॐ

User avatar
JiggeryPokery
Posts: 1093
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 09 Jul 2019

diminished wrote:
09 Jul 2019
Since you have no problem with posting private conversations, could you post a screenshot of the "trolls" and "idiots" claims (and your response to that) too?
So he calls esselfortium a troll for suggesting RE development is easy, then, um, confirms it's easy and it's best to let you guys "the idiots" think it's hard.
Last edited by JiggeryPokery on 10 Jul 2019, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
MrFigg
Posts: 4537
Joined: 20 Apr 2018

Post 09 Jul 2019

JiggeryPokery wrote:
09 Jul 2019
diminished wrote:
09 Jul 2019
Since you have no problem with posting private conversations, could you post a screenshot of the "trolls" and "idiots" claims (and your response to that) too?
So he calls esselfortium a troll for suggesting RE development is easy, then, um, confirms it's easy and it's best to let you guys "the idiots" think it's hard.

Screenshot_20190709_221306_com.facebook.orca.jpg
Just wondering...why didn’t you call him on it when he wrote it instead of waiting until now and posting it publicly?
丰2ॐ

User avatar
JiggeryPokery
Posts: 1093
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 09 Jul 2019

MrFigg wrote:
09 Jul 2019
diminished wrote:
09 Jul 2019


Since you have no problem with posting private conversations, could you post a screenshot of the "trolls" and "idiots" claims (and your response to that) too?
Personally I think that posting screenshots of private messages on a public forum is unacceptable behavior.

People, beware what you write to Jiggery-Pokery. Your conversation may end up being fired up on the internet.
Really, Mr F? :puf_unhappy: I've got a lot of respect for you and your support, so I have to say do you seriously think I take a decision to publish excerpts of one private conversation out of hundreds I have had over past few years that lightly? And even that, right after I've been specifically asked to provide facts, which demonstrate the attitude of a man who intentionally ripped off a lot of users by making out his work was his own, and suggesting it more complicated than it really was. Do a search on the Chambre ReFill thread from 2015, and ironically even Marco's pointing out issues with it, and at least one person notes the strangeness of the samples being wet. There are even some strange comments from Andrew himself right there in that thread about competing developers downvoting his ReFills. The problem is, that's not really possible because no dev is going to buy a product just to downvote it, as ReFills require purchase in order to rate them, it's not like REs at all, which only require a trial.

He's a big boy and he had plenty of opportunity to defend himself, but he chose not to, because he couldn't, and now there's some kind of weird revisionism where suddenly he's the victim and people calling him out for his behaviour are the villains? And it upsets me to this this, as someone who strives to work hard and provide original and interesting devices in Reason for a goddamn pittance, and who has actually hand-recorded thousands of samples of actual hardware over the years, and hand-edited a lot of them. I've also actually licensed some other samples too, via Hollow Sun. And alongside the other developers here who strive to do the same, what Skelton did slapped every goddamn one of us in the face. Rather than stand up for us, he's the one who gets defended? The fact his son is autistic is a personal tragedy, I have deep sympathy for that, but it doesn't give him a free pass to commit fraud.

I liked Andrew, we'd had a couple more conversations over the years shooting the shit about IDT stuff, I was bitterly disappointed and pretty furious when I found out what he'd done.

User avatar
JiggeryPokery
Posts: 1093
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 09 Jul 2019

MrFigg wrote:
09 Jul 2019
JiggeryPokery wrote:
09 Jul 2019


So he calls esselfortium a troll for suggesting RE development is easy, then, um, confirms it's easy and it's best to let you guys "the idiots" think it's hard.

Screenshot_20190709_221306_com.facebook.orca.jpg
Just wondering...why didn’t you call him on it when he wrote it instead of waiting until now and posting it publicly?
Because of the lack of context of the conversation at the time. I didn't know what thread he was talking about. I mean I've had a few critics on threads, and yeah, it is a bit disheartening so I assumed he just wanted get some frustration off his chest. But then I knew essel a bit, cos she'd done some paid work for me the previous year, so I didn't really want to get in the middle and disparage her. His comments really only made sense a few days later after I saw the video. (I think the video appeared about a week after that conversation?)

User avatar
boingy
Posts: 791
Joined: 01 Feb 2019

Post 10 Jul 2019

JiggeryPokery wrote:
09 Jul 2019
MrFigg wrote:
09 Jul 2019


Personally I think that posting screenshots of private messages on a public forum is unacceptable behavior.

People, beware what you write to Jiggery-Pokery. Your conversation may end up being fired up on the internet.
Really, Mr F? :puf_unhappy: I've got a lot of respect for you and your support, so I have to say do you seriously think I take a decision to publish excerpts of one private conversation out of hundreds I have had over past few years that lightly? And even that, right after I've been specifically asked to provide facts, which demonstrate the attitude of a man who intentionally ripped off a lot of users by making out his work was his own, and suggesting it more complicated than it really was. Do a search on the Chambre ReFill thread from 2015, and ironically even Marco's pointing out issues with it, and at least one person notes the strangeness of the samples being wet. There are even some strange comments from Andrew himself right there in that thread about competing developers downvoting his ReFills. The problem is, that's not really possible because no dev is going to buy a product just to downvote it, as ReFills require purchase in order to rate them, it's not like REs at all, which only require a trial.

He's a big boy and he had plenty of opportunity to defend himself, but he chose not to, because he couldn't, and now there's some kind of weird revisionism where suddenly he's the victim and people calling him out for his behaviour are the villains? And it upsets me to this this, as someone who strives to work hard and provide original and interesting devices in Reason for a goddamn pittance, and who has actually hand-recorded thousands of samples of actual hardware over the years, and hand-edited a lot of them. I've also actually licensed some other samples too, via Hollow Sun. And alongside the other developers here who strive to do the same, what Skelton did slapped every goddamn one of us in the face. Rather than stand up for us, he's the one who gets defended? The fact his son is autistic is a personal tragedy, I have deep sympathy for that, but it doesn't give him a free pass to commit fraud.

I liked Andrew, we'd had a couple more conversations over the years shooting the shit about IDT stuff, I was bitterly disappointed and pretty furious when I found out what he'd done.
I'm with Figgy on this one. Regardless of how the conversation makes you feel you should never publish a private conversation on a public forum. Unacceptable..

User avatar
MrFigg
Posts: 4537
Joined: 20 Apr 2018

Post 10 Jul 2019

JiggeryPokery wrote:
09 Jul 2019
MrFigg wrote:
09 Jul 2019


Personally I think that posting screenshots of private messages on a public forum is unacceptable behavior.

People, beware what you write to Jiggery-Pokery. Your conversation may end up being fired up on the internet.
Really, Mr F? :puf_unhappy: I've got a lot of respect for you and your support, so I have to say do you seriously think I take a decision to publish excerpts of one private conversation out of hundreds I have had over past few years that lightly? And even that, right after I've been specifically asked to provide facts, which demonstrate the attitude of a man who intentionally ripped off a lot of users by making out his work was his own, and suggesting it more complicated than it really was. Do a search on the Chambre ReFill thread from 2015, and ironically even Marco's pointing out issues with it, and at least one person notes the strangeness of the samples being wet. There are even some strange comments from Andrew himself right there in that thread about competing developers downvoting his ReFills. The problem is, that's not really possible because no dev is going to buy a product just to downvote it, as ReFills require purchase in order to rate them, it's not like REs at all, which only require a trial.

He's a big boy and he had plenty of opportunity to defend himself, but he chose not to, because he couldn't, and now there's some kind of weird revisionism where suddenly he's the victim and people calling him out for his behaviour are the villains? And it upsets me to this this, as someone who strives to work hard and provide original and interesting devices in Reason for a goddamn pittance, and who has actually hand-recorded thousands of samples of actual hardware over the years, and hand-edited a lot of them. I've also actually licensed some other samples too, via Hollow Sun. And alongside the other developers here who strive to do the same, what Skelton did slapped every goddamn one of us in the face. Rather than stand up for us, he's the one who gets defended? The fact his son is autistic is a personal tragedy, I have deep sympathy for that, but it doesn't give him a free pass to commit fraud.

I liked Andrew, we'd had a couple more conversations over the years shooting the shit about IDT stuff, I was bitterly disappointed and pretty furious when I found out what he'd done.
Yeah, I get that. I don’t think you took the decision
lightly. I would also like to say, that it is in no way my aim to see what I wrote turn into a debate on this Zampled thread about whether it is ok for people (you being people in this instance :) ) to post screenshots of messages which were sent privately between two individuals. What the guy did ripping off other people’s work and taking other people’s money was wrong What the guy wrote was demeaning to his users. None of that was good. I do still think though that a private correspondence should remain private. But now I’m just repeating myself.
丰2ॐ

sleep1979

Post 10 Jul 2019

Fcuk me i opened up a can of worms here aint i 😂

User avatar
Magnus
Posts: 139
Joined: 03 Jul 2018

Post 10 Jul 2019

MrFigg wrote:
09 Jul 2019
diminished wrote:
09 Jul 2019


Since you have no problem with posting private conversations, could you post a screenshot of the "trolls" and "idiots" claims (and your response to that) too?
Personally I think that posting screenshots of private messages on a public forum is unacceptable behavior.

People, beware what you write to Jiggery-Pokery. Your conversation may end up being fired up on the internet.
To be fair to Jiggery-Pokery, the above is absolute nonsense.

Skelton forfeited his rights to privacy with regards to those messages (which are explicitly about the Reason community btw!) when he so fraudulently ripped off the Reason community and then disappeared without an apology when he got rumbled. The fact we're even still having to have this conversation where his guilt is needing to be proved and reasserted is outrageous; and that is the sole reason those images have been posted.

Skelton's behaviour is indefensible; he isn't the victim here. He is a criminal. Has he refunded any of the people he stole from or remunerated Native Instruments for misappropriation of their work? Has he fuck.

sleep1979

Post 10 Jul 2019

MrFigg wrote:
10 Jul 2019
JiggeryPokery wrote:
09 Jul 2019


Really, Mr F? :puf_unhappy: I've got a lot of respect for you and your support, so I have to say do you seriously think I take a decision to publish excerpts of one private conversation out of hundreds I have had over past few years that lightly? And even that, right after I've been specifically asked to provide facts, which demonstrate the attitude of a man who intentionally ripped off a lot of users by making out his work was his own, and suggesting it more complicated than it really was. Do a search on the Chambre ReFill thread from 2015, and ironically even Marco's pointing out issues with it, and at least one person notes the strangeness of the samples being wet. There are even some strange comments from Andrew himself right there in that thread about competing developers downvoting his ReFills. The problem is, that's not really possible because no dev is going to buy a product just to downvote it, as ReFills require purchase in order to rate them, it's not like REs at all, which only require a trial.

He's a big boy and he had plenty of opportunity to defend himself, but he chose not to, because he couldn't, and now there's some kind of weird revisionism where suddenly he's the victim and people calling him out for his behaviour are the villains? And it upsets me to this this, as someone who strives to work hard and provide original and interesting devices in Reason for a goddamn pittance, and who has actually hand-recorded thousands of samples of actual hardware over the years, and hand-edited a lot of them. I've also actually licensed some other samples too, via Hollow Sun. And alongside the other developers here who strive to do the same, what Skelton did slapped every goddamn one of us in the face. Rather than stand up for us, he's the one who gets defended? The fact his son is autistic is a personal tragedy, I have deep sympathy for that, but it doesn't give him a free pass to commit fraud.

I liked Andrew, we'd had a couple more conversations over the years shooting the shit about IDT stuff, I was bitterly disappointed and pretty furious when I found out what he'd done.
Yeah, I get that. I don’t think you took the decision
lightly. I would also like to say, that it is in no way my aim to see what I wrote turn into a debate on this Zampled thread about whether it is ok for people (you being people in this instance :) ) to post screenshots of messages which were sent privately between two individuals. What the guy did ripping off other people’s work and taking other people’s money was wrong What the guy wrote was demeaning to his users. None of that was good. I do still think though that a private correspondence should remain private. But now I’m just repeating myself.
To be honest figg I'm with jiggery , all skelton done has hurt the refill business probably as more people are dubious now of smaller companys selling refills , so he gave up his right to privacy on this subject , if he said he had cheated on his wife ten times with a man and jiggery showed that , that would be a different story , but he is just showing facts of the matter in hand , i don't see anything wrong with that tbh

User avatar
MrFigg
Posts: 4537
Joined: 20 Apr 2018

Post 10 Jul 2019

Magnus wrote:
10 Jul 2019
MrFigg wrote:
09 Jul 2019


Personally I think that posting screenshots of private messages on a public forum is unacceptable behavior.

People, beware what you write to Jiggery-Pokery. Your conversation may end up being fired up on the internet.
To be fair to Jiggery-Pokery, the above is absolute nonsense.

Skelton forfeited his rights to privacy with regards to those messages (which are explicitly about the Reason community btw!) when he so fraudulently ripped off the Reason community and then disappeared without an apology when he got rumbled. The fact we're even still having to have this conversation where his guilt is needing to be proved and reasserted is outrageous; and that is the sole reason those images have been posted.

Skelton's behaviour is indefensible; he isn't the victim here. He is a criminal. Has he refunded any of the people he stole from or remunerated Native Instruments for misappropriation of their work? Has he fuck.
What is it that’s “absolute nonsense”?

My point has nothing to do with defending Skelton’s or anyone else’s behavior. I was stating my own view and opposition to the public posting of private conversations. Two completely different issues.

As an aside, I do personally find your statement “Skelton forfeited his rights to privacy ” to be very disconcerting, especially in our current climate.
Again, and without any reference to Skelton or his actions, privacy is a fundamental human right. Making personal evaluations as to whether someone is entitled to their fundamental rights or not takes society into very dangerous territory.
Last edited by MrFigg on 10 Jul 2019, edited 1 time in total.
丰2ॐ

User avatar
Magnus
Posts: 139
Joined: 03 Jul 2018

Post 10 Jul 2019

MrFigg wrote:
10 Jul 2019
Magnus wrote:
10 Jul 2019


To be fair to Jiggery-Pokery, the above is absolute nonsense.

Skelton forfeited his rights to privacy with regards to those messages (which are explicitly about the Reason community btw!) when he so fraudulently ripped off the Reason community and then disappeared without an apology when he got rumbled. The fact we're even still having to have this conversation where his guilt is needing to be proved and reasserted is outrageous; and that is the sole reason those images have been posted.

Skelton's behaviour is indefensible; he isn't the victim here. He is a criminal. Has he refunded any of the people he stole from or remunerated Native Instruments for misappropriation of their work? Has he fuck.
What is it that’s “absolute nonsense”?

My point has nothing to do with defending Skelton’s or anyone else’s behavior. I was stating my own view and opposition to the public posting of private conversations. Two completely different issues.
Your wording and attitude is absolute nonsense: "People, beware what you write to Jiggery-Pokery. Your conversation may end up being fired up on the internet.". You're trying to smear Jiggery-Pokery's good name with that statement, when you know fine well these are very special circumstances that deserve such information to be made public. The importance of this is even greater given the ongoing attempts by some to defend Skelton's name or try to throw his fraudulent behaviour into doubt.

User avatar
MrFigg
Posts: 4537
Joined: 20 Apr 2018

Post 10 Jul 2019

Don’t know if you missed this bit Magnus:

As an aside, I do personally find your statement “Skelton forfeited his rights to privacy ” to be very disconcerting, especially in our current climate.
Again, and without any reference to Skelton or his actions, privacy is a fundamental human right. Making personal evaluations as to whether someone is entitled to their fundamental rights or not takes society into very dangerous territory.

JP responded directly to me over what I had commented with his reasons. He stated he respects me. I respect him. The issue here has nothing to do with defending fraudulent behaviour.

You’re now making allegations that I’m trying to “smear Jiggery Pokery’s good name”. How do you KNOW what I’m trying to do?
Last edited by MrFigg on 10 Jul 2019, edited 1 time in total.
丰2ॐ

User avatar
diminished
Posts: 1682
Joined: 15 Dec 2018

Post 10 Jul 2019

MrFigg wrote:
10 Jul 2019
Don’t know if you missed this bit Magnus:

As an aside, I do personally find your statement “Skelton forfeited his rights to privacy ” to be very disconcerting, especially in our current climate.
Again, and without any reference to Skelton or his actions, privacy is a fundamental human right. Making personal evaluations as to whether someone is entitled to their fundamental rights or not takes society into very dangerous territory.
Well said.

Look guys just because someone is a fraud (which is something 99% of us can agree on) it is not okay to post private conversations publicly, no matter who this is about. I asked for more excerpts provocatively because I couldn't believe those were posted in the first place. That my request wasn't taken as a broad hint and followed up upon left me speechless tbh. Big no-no.
:reason: Most recent track: resentment (synthwave) || Others: on my YouTube channel •ᴗ•

User avatar
Loque
Posts: 7457
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

Post 10 Jul 2019

diminished wrote:
10 Jul 2019
MrFigg wrote:
10 Jul 2019
Don’t know if you missed this bit Magnus:

As an aside, I do personally find your statement “Skelton forfeited his rights to privacy ” to be very disconcerting, especially in our current climate.
Again, and without any reference to Skelton or his actions, privacy is a fundamental human right. Making personal evaluations as to whether someone is entitled to their fundamental rights or not takes society into very dangerous territory.
Well said.

Look guys just because someone is a fraud (which is something 99% of us can agree on) it is not okay to post private conversations publicly, no matter who this is about. I asked for more excerpts provocatively because I couldn't believe those were posted in the first place. That my request wasn't taken as a broad hint and followed up upon left me speechless tbh. Big no-no.
While i widely agree and i like my privacy very much, i see the requirement on the other side to have someone "leaking" information to have a clue whats going on and if someone failed in his moral deeply which result in penalty of other people, i want to know who, why and whom. While i am not a lawyer, this might be the case here even if this screenshots does not provide evidence rather an indication. IMHO this could have been handled differently and it did not really need to be leaked that way, i still appreciate someone to have the strength to leak such information and stand the argues.
:reason: 11, Win10 64Bit.

  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 1 guest