I feel that is completely unacceptable.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Can you explain please, I’m not sure how to do that, based on Steinberg’s bailing, as described here Issue forum streamlined - Cubase - Steinberg Forums :
We have decided to reduce the complexity of this dedicated issue forum. > We will continue to collect your bug reports, but > there will be no managed “collected” or “closed” sub-forums anymore > … We could have made the decision to emphasise more on this issues forum and have a dedicated support agent and quality assurance engineer constantly work in here. But in this case both of them would not be able to > improve the regular support to our customers > nor the quality of our products.
We really appreciate your reports and we definitely scan this forum and use your reports to improve our software. The entries are still approved by our team members, > but we won’t actively manage this forum anymore since we think that we can use our resources more efficiently if we focus on the direct support via the ticketing system and our quality assurance and testing processes.
Imagine how much longer than a 7-week delay it would take to get an answer from Steinberg’s Support Request if they had not decided to “stop actively managing this forum … to use our resources more efficiently … to focus on the direct support via the ticketing system and our quality assurance and testing processes”!
It sounds like we should be grateful for the delay being only 7 weeks! 