On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Mike Marsh wrote:
> Ya know, Paul, this is the most traffic I've seen generated in a
> while. In my humble opinion, I think there is enough interest here
> to push this up in priority. I know the software is the long pole,
> but boy I'd ∗love∗ to play multiple simultaneous phat notes...not
> that I could actually ∗play∗ them very well.
>
I'm not convinced that the number of messages about the motm 650 alone
indicates a relative interest for one module over another, especially
since many of the messages were option responses to Paul's original motm
650 post.
Paul stated that motm 650 is in "R&D" and there are several modules that have
been in the queue (R&D or otherwise) that IMHO deserve their 'due',
e.g., pan/fade, dual pulse divider (personal biases: Yes).
A better (although still problematic) indicator is to ask for a rank vote
on users' interests in a specified selection of modules. Paul has done
this in the past, and I suspect would do it again if he has an interest
in knowing our opinions.
Jeff