Legacy feature requests are suddenly hidden/private
We’ve hidden the legacy features, as people who would search the forum would find old versions of feature request instead of the newer open posts. It’s difficult enough to find things on the forum as is. My hope is that we can make the cut now, and these will eventually work their way out of links / discussion. I understand that there may be some dead links now, but I still believe that this is the cleaner way going forward. None of the legacy requests have been updated in more than a year.
The new feature request section should have all the necessary information about the features, and the conversation should continue in these posts.
if anyone feels that there is something potentially super important / enticing behind a dead legacy feature link, just flag the post for moderation with the reason “something else” and the reason why, and we will try to pull the relevant info over.
Pinning this for now.
7 Likes
There were lots of good discussions, and it was useful as a reference to resurrect old feature requests when the limited number of feature requests that can be voted for right now get implemented or rejected.
1 Like
I am also unwelcomely surprised that this part of the forum has been deactivated without prior notice. I read back regularly and got good references from it.
I also have quite a few letters of typing in this area and I would appreciate it very, very much if this section disappears, this can be reopened for at least another 2 weeks (the rest of the year), so that I and others who want to can save some things local in personal docs for any future additions/reference that we can no longer find back with a forum search. After the active users (including myself) have had this chance to save some detailed suggestions, which sometimes took a lot of time, this book can indeed be closed as far as I’m concerned. Could you consider this @AIRVince ?
Wasn’t it already locked? I don’t think it should be hidden or deleted at all. It was a public part of the forum and should remain a public part of the forum, just like how Pioneer, Imageline, DJ TechTools, and everyone else does it. It’s not as if it violated any forum use agreement that warrants censoring it by deleting or hiding it. People put work into this stuff for free in the posts and discussions, and the least InMusic can do is allow that work to last in the public domain… especially considering the amount of effort that’s been put into this forum since the rough initial release of the Prime line that people have stuck with. That’s basic free grunt dev type attribution etiquette.
1 Like
I welcome the decision for the legacy/pre-user voting requests to be hidden to ensure they don’t confuse users when they use the search facility.
If the was an option in each forum section to allow/deny each forum section to be included or excluded in search results, that would have been good too, but that wouldn’t stop google remembering the old old legacy requests.
As for “effort” that people put into those old legacy requests… well, only with hindsight can it be seen that the feature wasn’t, or couldn’t be implemented.
There’s hundreds and hundreds of user requests available for voting - that’s not a “limit” in any way.
May I suggest that the legacy requests section is made into a read only section. ie Disable comments, liking etc.
Just call that section Forum Archives or something.
I have some bookmarks saved from the legacy requests to help other users.
Obviously the forum is Denon’s private property and y’all can do as you wish.
A Yoruba proverb loosely translates “if you forget where you are coming from, you won’t know where you are going”.
4 Likes
I fail to see how it was confusing since one you can vote on and the others you can’t… and I thought they were locked, anyway. If people weren’t adding new posts to them, they were as good as locked. They were certainly being read. However, I’m sure there are plenty of people who would like embarrassing quotes of their posts in those discussions to get hidden away permanently, though.
I agree with them being locked, but not with new URLs, as there are posts that link to them, and then other threads they link to like a kind of indexing system that’s useful.
As for the private property part, the legality one way or another of dumping people’s content on a public forum en masse is beside the point. It’s abnormal and bad treatment towards uncompensated contributors… and in this case customers.
This makes sense.
I don’t recall there being anything listed anywhere which said that a note, idea, suggestion or opinion listed on the forum will stay visible forever and ever in perpetuity
It’s implicit. This is a public forum, not some hidden, private section. This goes way outside the norms of proper treatment of contributors.
1 Like
It really isn’t - like so many things, that’s just your “take” on it.
It is, what it is… or rather, thankfully, was.
What are you talking about? 