Yes, that is the problem with the written word. It's all too easy to read something differently than was intended.
Thanks.
May I recommend reading the whole thread all over again with fresh eyes? Its usually quite a learning experience to reread conversations after a while. I noticed comments such as "If you read what you just wrote [...], do you honestly think this is an acceptable alternative?" which to my eyes at least may not be the most efficient recipe for avoiding Robot Growls (TM). And yes, written communication can be challenging! Especially on the net where one usually do not have real life relations to the people one communicates with.
But in the context it was said in, it was not like you quoted in isolation. Above the sentence you just quoted was an explanation that as far as I was concerned, it was a long and convoluted way to achieve something that already happens without any button presses. All I did was quote the procedure then ask the poster to read what he had said and asked if he thought it was an acceptable alternative to the way it is implemented now.
If you look for aggression, you will find it. I think you and the DSI employee are reading far too much into this.
I have reread this thread several times. You are still reading it looking for aggression while I only wrote it being very disappointed and thought I was being fobbed off that this was somehow a better way if doing things. We have established it's not.
It's just a synth. It's not life changing. I think it sounds great and all the extra functionality is fantastic. That is why I wanted one. Hence the disappointment of the way certain things were implemented. The ability to paste an A or B layer between presets is an absolute must. If this gets sorted, I am interested again.
I thought the dust had settled on this.... :-(