Audiotool board archive

that's what i'm saying

Same rule last time and half of the winners were Audiotool artists including the winner of the final. This time the jury decided differently

Isn't this an audiotool partnered event? It would make more sense if an audiotool track could be placed here.

I really don't have the reasons to explain why I am this mad, but I think it isn't completely irrational. Also, we're not mad at the winners. We're mad at AT. This isn't the only problem and it's not a one-time case. What is it AT is trying to achieve with this, is my question. What's in FOR THEM right here. Not much in for people who actually use the built-in studio.

It's not even EWCs fault.
If the plan is to get more people to use the platform this isn't doing it for many of us. The exact opposite.

it's an audiotool sponsored event
don't tell me audiotool as a daw doesn't matter on audiotool itself, you silly goose

expectations were simply set

Another Perspective:
Let's say your a 15 year old kid. You want to start making music but don't have money or skills developed to use other DAW programs, but you understand the basics. You tune into the EWC and see that there’s a competition going on using a site called Audiotool and the a good majority of the users are just like you. This event, whether you like it or not, is a business marketing partnership to attract more users to the site by exposing the capabilities of what's possible with online music production. Not sure if you're aware of how crazy it is to have a completely free DAW be operational for just shy of 2 decades, but that shit is costly over time. We thankfully aren't bogged down by ads like the rest of the internet, but the reality of the situation is that you, as an AT user/community member are intrinsically connected to the sites broader outreach and marketing just by being on here. Audiotool is a TOOL to start learning for more creative audio production strategies and also a community driven resource as well. No one said we had to cement ourselves to it. If yall just wanted AT favoritism, knowing other DAWs were involved, then that is a bit naive ngl.

i think the point here is being lost in context

the matter at hand is usage of the audiotool studio itself on an event most likely to promote this site, clearly it's marketing
but the point being skirted around is the impression based around the contest winners that audiotool as a DAW is being put at the backburner
so essentially we are promoting audiotool whilst promoting not using audiotool at the same time, that in itself makes no sense to me
but that's what i have been seeing lately

say what you want about audiotool being a "tool to learn" when it's actually a functional DAW, but this current generation of users hardly put in the effort to learn how the studio works itself

bottom line? we simply want to encourage people to try to use audiotool

Gravidon, I think it's extremely unproductive to call peoples very reasonable perspectives on the matter "naive". An expectation that there would be (at least very minimal) AT favoritism I believe is reasonable as we are on AT. For example: someone hosts a game development competition in the Unity engine, and you make your project in Unreal Engine then submit it to that competition with a Unity coat of paint. If you submitted that project using Unreal Engine and complained about people that used Unity having a "home field advantage" you would be flamed for that. However, if you instead imported some assets you created in Unreal to Unity that would be acceptable.

What would be absolute bullshit is if they person that hosted the competition for a specific game engine had your game (which used a different engine) win the whole thing.

Do you see why people have this perspective? Could you at least respect it, even if you still don't agree with us?

Why do you think there wasn't AT favouritism? All the info given here is who won. No information on the rest of the rankings, no information on the disparity between those rankings, not whether AT studio tracks were given points for being made in the studio. These are assumptions being made purely because an AT studio tracks didn't win this year. I don't have that info either, just pointing out it's not there yet conclusions are being drawn.

Or did you want an AT studio tracks to win, regardless of the quality of the other tracks being uploaded within the rules (clearly outlined as allowing stem upload, just like last year when Jetdarc won)?

Like the people who 'won' the competition clearly aren't even here for AT. They have no tracks favored, and they're not even active. Not to mention one of them used AI art. This is a really really bad look for Audiotool. I now see where Audiotool is heading, and I am incredibly disappointed.

If you really follow what's happening on Audiotool you will have noticed that many of us are calling out Audiotool on the fact that tracks which are first on the ranking of the week are only a track imported into Audiotool without there being any work done on the platform. Indeed, paid software also allows the use of paid VSTs and opens up other perspectives open only to license owners. My philosophy is that the platform promotes free music and free track design, and I find that these results take us away from this vision. Far from me any feelings of dubious jealousy, I don't need Audiotool to make a living.

🙂

https://www.audiotool.com/track/4u55kkhoe/
here's my honest and genuine reaction

Also, no 15 year old kid who saw AT for the first time could ever compete with whomever enters from a different DAW. NOT POSSIBLE.

https://www.audiotool.com/track/bx32kyn1cil/

Yito, you missed the point of that perspective analogy. Of course a teenage kid would get curb stomped in a event like this. The goal is to present a music community that invites them the opportunity to pursue music production, not becoming the next Tiesto or Deadmau5 overnight (depends tho, ive seen this shit before lol). I also agree yall that AT needs to do better with internal promotions for long time users and I'm optimistic that we'll have more improvements, especially with the studio update around the corner. As far the weekly charts, that's a community issue with the networks of each respective user (whether or not the people you follow or your followers are consistently active and engaged with the social platform). I hate a lack of creative thinking in this DAW as much as the next guy but that's honestly a tough problem to solve in regards to which tracks/users get better screentime or favs. If the Devs started policing tracks because of their content to moderate what charts each week, it would be a very slippery slope for internal biases. I also think that lack of intervention may have contributed to these results as well. Double edge sword.

What is a 15-year-old supposed to do with a $10,000 promotion deal?
This contest was aimed at fully developed artists — musicians who can compete with external professionals and be featured at a major event alongside film and game composers.
This time, the advantage went to the external participants — and to be honest, not entirely without reason.

Who really engaged with the theme, submitted a track that matched the context, and showed a level of composition and sound quality that could hold its own not just against non-Audiotool musicians, but in a professional setting without feeling out of place?

If this kind of framework isn’t for you — fine. Then don’t participate, and next time, read the rules as thoroughly as Sim did.
But please, treat the invited musicians like the colleagues they are.

which is why i don't mess with these big contests with big prize pools
this is more for professional producers and composers than the community itself, and audiotool really isn't as fleshed out or even optimized for professional level producing more or less discouraging some to not use audiotool

not saying you can't push it's limits, i have seen what people can do

but again said this is an audiotool hosted event, so the expectations naturally were set along the community and the audiotool studio as a DAW whether explicitly stated or implied

if anything they could have hosted this contest elsewhere and invite us to participate alternatively instead of audiotool being home court, warranting less backlash

yeah for something on the scale of a global competition, maybe audiotool wasn't the best place to host this...

I still don't understand why EWC is hosted on AT, despite that. If it is because of just being sponsored, I do get it. But in that case, it excludes the need for the community and the need for the studio almost entirely. The winners simply aren't part of the audiotool studio and are able to use any VST and trick at their disposal, which is not natively possible. I'm not hating on them, but we are not colleagues. Plus, I know the rules. I'm just confused why Gravidon brought up an inexperienced newbie for the analogy. "YOU GET SEEN" Who gets seen on AT? The only one who will get seen is the winner.
Why is AT the middleman?

agreed. let’s not attack the winners. yes, they didn’t use audiotool. they were chosen by a board who didn’t care enough to honor actual audiotool producers, it’s not their fault 🤷‍♂️

Bad month already for audiotool, especially with AI generated music being allowed.

Like, they gotta see THIS is not helping them.

There were always five judges this year. Not sure why that's relevant though.

They don’t wanna make a public response 🤷‍♂️

It is what it is tbh because they are just digging they own grave. AI allowed, now this. They don’t care about the community anymore, they used to care, but now they don’t.

Why would you even post this if it’s irrelevant?

I feel you man, but idk if we can even blame the judges. It's not like THEY are even Audiotool members, they probably were just given a list of songs to go through after June 22 and told to pick the best two. The biggest fault here was allowing non-AT submissions using only stems, since that directly contradicts the idea of promoting AT as a production software. Not to mention it gives a huge advantage to people with higher-end DAWs like FL and Ableton and so on. I think if their goal with this contest was to promote Audiotool for its own sake, they def should have restricted the rules. But the way they handled it makes me believe they just wanted uncopyrighted new music that's "good enough", without actually caring about what the community wanted or respecting the spirit of AT-pure production.

when the contest was announced, they only displayed 3 judges. idk it's prolly not that deep but just confused me a little

i swear it was just 3, i might be tripping lol

If that was the case, why can’t the admins be the judges then. They make it seem like the EWC was special for audiotool only, where audiotool users could finally have the chance. But no they told them go fuck yourself and then pull this grand scheme of bullshit. Why should shit being made on different DAWs win over shit that was made on audiotool? They don’t care about the community, that’s why many switched to something better. I know I’m saying this, but it’s because I love audiotool, and I will never leave the site. But it’s been losing my respect over and over again. And many others on audiotool. I’m not gonna leave the site that planted the roots in my musical journey, but they need to make some changes.

If they had admins as judges, they would probably face criticism from non-AT submissions about favoritism or something. The bias can easily go both ways, which is why I still think the best solution would be to force all submissions to be Audiotool-only. But of course that would make the competition much more challenging for most people...

Besides, there would still be a major conflict of interest: AT wants exposure, but EWC wants good music. 9 times out of 10, you'll get better music using more powerful tools, thus, they allow 3rd party DAWs to be submitted. The judges don't even matter in this situation, their only job is to identify "good music" that fits the event. They don't care about the community and don't necessarily have to unless that was part of their assignment, which we would all have been much happier with if it was. It really sucks but that's just life tbh...

having admins as judges would be better because atleast they know how much effort and how much they pushed audiotool to the limits for their beats. And also what would there be bias if EWC is basically for audiotool. But you are right, audiotool only submissions will be really good and great for the community. And it could if prevented on what you said, AT wanting exposure and EWC wanting good music

@gravidon the word "unsportsmanlike" is clearly out of the table. This is an audiotool competition. If this is not a rule, why did they partner to begin with?

nah, it was def 3 bro, wtf

This needs to be said: the way Audiotool handled the EWC 2025 Contest is bullshit, and a lot of people in the community feel it.

Let’s be clear: the winners aren’t the issue. No one’s denying that JNATHYN and FranzFritz are talented producers. The problem is, it’s obvious they didn’t use the Audiotool DAW. Yet they walked away with the grand prize — $10,000, a pro vinyl press, Dolby Atmos mastering, LANDR Pro, and more.

Meanwhile, other producers in this community followed the rules. They made their tracks inside Audiotool, dealing with the DAW’s limits, quirks, and CPU issues, all to stay loyal to the platform and the standards they were told to follow. In previous years, Audiotool even removed tracks that were made externally. So what happened?

This year, without a single public update or change in guidelines, you let externally produced tracks not only enter — but win. You didn’t clarify anything. You didn’t update the rules. You just quietly shifted the standards and acted like nothing changed.

That’s not just frustrating. That’s not just unfair. That’s bullshit — and here’s why.

Let’s talk about what bullshit really means. Philosopher Harry Frankfurt wrote about it: a lie is when someone knows the truth and hides it. Bullshit, though, is when someone doesn’t care about the truth at all. They say whatever works in the moment, whatever looks good, whatever helps them get by — without any consistency, honesty, or respect for principle.

That’s what this contest became.

You told people that it was about creating music in Audiotool, then gave the biggest awards to tracks that clearly weren’t. You let artists pour time into learning your DAW, staying inside its limits, struggling with workarounds — and then overlooked them completely in favor of externally produced polish.

If this was now an “open format” contest, why didn’t you say that? Why pretend the playing field was level when it clearly wasn’t? You promoted the idea of fairness, community, and honoring Audiotool users — but your actions showed the exact opposite.

This was not a celebration of Audiotool music. It was a celebration of what looks good for Audiotool’s image, even if it ignores the people who actually use and support the DAW.

The worst part is the damage this does long term. You taught your community that following the rules doesn’t matter. That using the DAW doesn’t matter. That if someone just uploads a polished track made in FL Studio or Ableton, they’ll be rewarded more than people who worked inside the actual environment your platform was built on.

It’s demoralizing. It breaks trust. And it tells the people who supported you — and helped make this platform what it is — that they don’t matter when it’s time to hand out prizes.

This isn't growth. It’s selling out your values.

If the rules changed, say it. If this is no longer about showcasing what people can do inside Audiotool, say that too. But don’t pretend this was fair. Don’t disrespect the artists who followed the rules and gave you their best.

You owe your users better. You owe your creators an honest answer.
This was supposed to be a celebration of the Audiotool community.
Instead, it was a reminder that bullshit rises to the top when principles disappear.

Do better.

The group of judges grew during the contest. Nothing wrong about it

You lost me at "everyone else followed the rules".
The rules do not disallow stem uploads.
EWC comp last year was why stem uploads were sanctioned across AT.

I get that you feel that that's not okay - I don't personally agree with stem upload per se - but it's within the rules.

Huh, I must have only checked out the judges after it had reached five members.

Big flaw in your logic here. Last year, Jetdarc won and rightfully so. He is an AT artist. So which is it? Does EWC favor the users on the site or not? Also, the rules stated that outside DAWs were permissible, so anybody could have a shot. It goes both ways. You guys really need to reexamine your personal biases, lol.

@callycus Respectfully, that misses the bigger point.

Sure, maybe stem uploads are technically “within the rules” now — but let’s not pretend that this has been clearly communicated or consistently enforced.

You're saying "the rules do not disallow stem uploads." Okay — but that’s not the same as saying they're encouraged, welcome, or on equal footing with tracks created inside the DAW. Most users didn’t get that message. In fact, many assumed the opposite, based on years of precedent.

You yourself just said:

“I don't personally agree with stem upload per se.”
That tells me even you see this as a gray area. So imagine how it feels for regular users who poured time and energy into building tracks natively in Audiotool — because they thought that was the expectation.

Just because something isn’t explicitly disallowed doesn’t mean the playing field is actually fair. There was no clarification, no updated contest FAQ, no post making it clear that full external production was now acceptable. That lack of communication is on Audiotool — not the community.

Saying “everyone else followed the rules” is shorthand for: they worked inside the DAW, because that’s what every previous contest emphasized. That’s what they believed this contest was about. And suddenly seeing externally made tracks win top honors — with no transparency — feels like a bait and switch.

So yeah, technically stem uploads might have been "allowed."

But when rules quietly shift without clear messaging, and decisions feel inconsistent with the platform’s core values — people notice. And they have every right to speak up.

This isn’t just about stems. It’s about trust.

https://www.audiotool.com/contest/ewc_2025_producer_contest-uljtxan3y

"You can find detailed instructions on how to upload your Stems in our https://audiotool.notion.site/EWC-2025-Contest-FAQ-1f8e84c2ac084769bf2c199fd3240c7c"

LMAOOOO

@gravidon Yeah, Jetdarc won last year, and he deserved it because he’s an Audiotool user who actually made his track inside the DAW. That was cool and fair — it made sense because the whole point of the contest was to show off what people can do in Audiotool.

But this year? It feels like the rules just magically changed and no one bothered to tell anyone. Suddenly, people who didn’t even use the DAW got the biggest prizes. And sure, maybe the rules technically say you can upload stems or tracks from outside DAWs, but that’s not what people expected or signed up for. No official update, no announcement, nothing.

That’s what bullshit is — when you say one thing but do another, and don’t even care about the truth or fairness. You just do whatever’s easiest or looks best for you, and hope nobody calls you out.

It’s not about “favoring Audiotool users” or “bias.” It’s about respect for the people who put in the time and effort to work inside the DAW because that’s what was expected. Then seeing others just upload finished tracks from other software and get rewarded? That hurts. It feels like a total slap in the face.

If you’re gonna let people use whatever DAW they want, just say that upfront. But pretending the rules are the same while rewarding something completely different? That’s the definition of bullshit.

So yeah, people are mad. And honestly, they have every right to be.

Why compare the two?

I do not see this as a grey area. It is super clear to me that it's allowed.
I don't like that, but I don't have to like it to know it exists.

And yes I will or would. Hopefully. Depends on school lol.

@gravidon if you're going to open your mouth at least put my dick in it

If uploading stems is encouraged, then what's the point in this being a contest hosted on audiotool?

@sterbli
Not the right way to talk about this.

@callycus Honestly, the biggest problem here is that music made inside the Audiotool DAW should absolutely have judges’ priority over tracks made in more professional, expensive DAWs. Not everyone has access to fancy software or equipment — Audiotool is special because it gives people a chance to create music without that barrier.

When someone makes an amazing track entirely in Audiotool, that’s a huge deal. It’s way harder to do, with fewer tools and more limitations. That effort and skill should count more in a contest run by Audiotool itself.

But now, when tracks made in Ableton, FL Studio, or other pro DAWs get the top prizes, it feels like the whole point is lost. The contest was announced on the Audiotool platform, so naturally, the community assumes it’s about music made in Audiotool — not outside of it. Most people don’t read every single rule carefully, especially when the main message feels like “show us your Audiotool music.”

It’s heartbreaking to watch Audiotool slowly shift away from supporting the creators who actually built this community. It feels like the focus is no longer on the DAW, the users, or the music itself — but just on pulling people to the site, getting streams or attention, no matter how.

That kind of direction risks ruining what made Audiotool special in the first place: the community and the shared creative challenge of making great music inside the DAW.

If Audiotool wants to grow, it should grow by lifting up its users and respecting the tools and people who got it here — not by quietly changing the rules and rewarding outside work without explaining why.

If you want to go down that route: whats the point of hosting a comp on any given site?

Heart - You and I have no idea how the judging was done. Perhaps AT tracks were given priority and still didn't cut it in the end? You're assuming there wasn't special treatment because they didn't win this time.

I build my own fx and synths and use them in my sound design work (games, adverts, filmsL. The people that use those sounds don't care that I made it with my own tools, they just care if it sounds how they want/need it to.
If someone else makes a better sound in a different (easier) way, it becomes no less valid. It's just better. I lose. I work harder to be better next time.

Bro, who gives a flying fuck whatever daw its made in. Music is music no matter where its made 😭😭😭

If you think that you can't make something better than any other music then I could tell that you don't have any connections to this community anymore.

I completely understand that, ultimately, what matters most is the quality of the music, regardless of the tools used to create it. However, since this contest is hosted by Audiotool—a platform known for its unique DAW—many in the community naturally expected the focus to be on music produced within Audiotool itself. This expectation has been shaped by past contests where the emphasis was clearly on in-DAW production.

When the contest results show winners who didn’t create their tracks inside Audiotool, without a clear announcement or explanation beforehand, it understandably causes confusion and frustration. It’s not necessarily a matter of the judges overlooking Audiotool-produced tracks because of quality, but more about the change in rules or judging criteria not being communicated transparently.

If the intention was to open the contest to submissions from any DAW, that’s completely valid and can bring in a wider range of talent. However, it’s important to clearly communicate such changes upfront so the community knows what to expect and can prepare accordingly. Without that, many artists who put effort into working within Audiotool might feel like their dedication wasn’t fully recognized or fairly evaluated.

Beyond just competition, this is about trust. The community believes in Audiotool as a platform that encourages creativity within its own environment, and they want to feel that their efforts are valued accordingly. Clear communication and respect for that commitment help maintain confidence in the contest’s fairness and the platform’s integrity.

Ultimately, transparency and consistent messaging about the rules and judging process are what build a strong, supportive community. When those elements are missing or unclear, even the most talented artists can feel overlooked or undervalued, which is a loss for everyone involved. @callycus

@yungwrld the problem is that this was a contest hosted on audiotool, a site with a built-in daw, where just importing stems from other daws was outright encouraged. It's a huge punch in the face to the audiotool community.

@yungwrld I get music is music, but this isn’t just some random contest — it’s an Audiotool contest. So yeah, the DAW absolutely matters here because the whole point was to showcase what can be made inside Audiotool. People spent hours learning and creating with the tools they had, expecting that to count for something. Suddenly throwing in outside DAWs and rewarding that without clear communication? That’s just disrespectful to the community and the effort people put in. It’s not about “music is music” here — it’s about fairness and trust.

I must agree with Awenix on that one.

If the EWC was hosted on audiotool, a special event for users of audiotool. Why would you add stems from a different DAW to dominate the limited resources that audiotool users have?

@yungwrld Music is music, you’re right. But the EWC and all of the events held by audiotool is for audiotool users only, not people who export stems and dump them here. Half of the people don’t even interact and as what I said “use as a breeding ground to promote their music”

Would yall have even cared if this was hosted on Soundcloud? That's such a weird argument. Yes, the point was to show what's possible on AT, but not every up and coming producer is exclusively an AT User. You can't have it both ways.

Nah the stuff on here isnt limited if yk what ur doing

No, If this was on SoundCloud, I wouldn’t care. But since it’s an Audiotool contest, it should focus on what can be made inside Audiotool. That’s the whole point. Letting any DAW enter without clear rules just confuses and feels unfair to the community that’s been creating here for years. It’s about respecting the platform and expectations. @gravidon

@yungwrld "Knowing what your doing on AT" wasn't a rule for the contest.
Making good/cool music was the point of the contest.

It kind of is,

Audiotool takes very dedicated knowledge on everything to make good music, but it is limited due to the fact that the studio doesn’t have a lot of features that other DAWs have. In other DAWs, let’s take serum for example. You just have to change a few things to get the sounds you want. On AT you have to sound design the whole entire shit and add a fuck ton of effects

I fuck with the site. Its just that the ones you gotta pay for are more fun and better quality. Ill always have a soft spot for this site tho
I wouldnt have gotten where i am with themis site it was a big stepping stone for me and m creativity so i have mad respect for this site.

Quinn, my point is. It’s limiting for the users who know how to push audiotool to their limits, because their hard work is disregarded by music from other daws that allow features for the producers to strive

Okay, I'm starting to understand the issue: nobody read the rules.

I've explained, and cited, the rules a couple of times and the same argument keeps circling back - "the rules were changed" Nope. They were the same rules as last year, and the rules didn't change during that event either. "The rules weren't clearly communicated" - well, they were in the same language as the rest of the post and are outlined on the terms and conditions page (where rules often are for official competitions to avoid clogging up the main post).

@officialawenix I make stuff using a blend of AT and FL; the ratio is never 50/50 but leans more towards Audiotool, and I feel like I'm super transparent about that. I still have certain AT tracks that are 100% home grown and indistinguishable from the ones with external assets. I make music. I don't believe in putting up barriers in how people wish to make music, period. That is the main issue I take with those mad at the selection here.

where can we find this top 8 list?

looking forward to it

And Quinn, you are right. Other DAWS are more fun,

However most people on audiotool resort to using the studio as they can’t afford the equipment, they can’t afford the DAWs. So them pushing audiotool to the limit, and losing just because the winners used a different DAW that basically has no limitations Vs Audiotool that has a lot of limitations, you can see why it’s discouraging for the audiotool users

(And also what Quinn said above me lmao)

Or cuz are on a shitty school chromebook 😂😂😂

VVV (literally the reason I use audiotool)

((not the chromebook thing but what's below that 😭😭😭 i got blocked last second lmao))

I get that the rules were technically there, and that people could have read them if they wanted to. But the issue isn’t just about the rules existing — it’s about how they were communicated. Most people don’t dig through every link or terms page before entering, especially when the main announcement and past contests strongly implied the focus was on making music inside Audiotool.

Clear, upfront communication in the main post or pinned messages is important to set expectations and avoid confusion. When something this big changes or stays the same but isn’t highlighted, it leads to frustration and misunderstanding — and that’s what we’re seeing here. It’s less about “not reading the rules” and more about how the rules are presented and reinforced to the community.

Good communication keeps a contest fair and keeps trust alive. Without it, even the clearest rules on a hidden page won’t help much.

@callycus

Even tho this site has limitions and is kinda hard to use at fist id recommend it to beginners

That’s kind of the point though — if Audiotool is limited and harder to use, doesn’t that make it even more impressive when someone creates a great track inside it? That’s exactly why people are frustrated. Beginners and longtime users push through those limits, learn the platform, and build something original — only to watch a contest hosted on that same platform reward people who didn’t use it at all.

If it’s truly meant for beginners and learning, then highlight the ones who committed to the challenge — not bypassed it with external tools. @yungwrld

Yup, I agree with what heart said below my comment rn.

Bruh i remember them chromebook days on here but i had a personal so it didnt have all that junk them school ons have in them that make em shitty lol

And that’s why it’s even more frustrating to see tracks made outside of Audiotool getting rewarded. People were out here using laggy school Chromebooks, pushing through insane limitations, and still managing to make full tracks. That takes way more effort than dragging in a polished stem from a pro DAW. So yeah, the tools used do matter when the platform itself is half the challenge.

At the end of the day, it is what it is.

some would say it takes "heart" to make a good track using just audiotool.... i'll see myself out

telling me that AT Day exists doesn't dodge the fact that this contest isn't as community focused
let alone i am pretty sure the rewards are way less than what we have here if not nothing

but in terms of external events, audiotool is more or less sidelined

https://www.audiotool.com/album/dlyw03/

yeaok

@gravidon There is no issue making 50/50, I made those tracks myself. The issue is that they made a 100% non-audiotool track. They don't have any connection with audiotool, and they don't deserve the crown.

in their defense, he quite literally vocoded a slur in response to the results of this, along with much more excessive hating... sucks that he's banned but he very easily could have just not acted so outrageously and been fine lol

LMAOOO

@duplexx I agree with taking action with the slur and 'hate speech', But I honestly do not thing that action should mean deleting an account from a user that's been here for 6 years.

A decently big timeout would do unless at is just trying to scare people off with it.

At devs should also have implemented some kind of input sanitization to prevent having loads of slurs on the site.

Genuinely, how hard is it to loop the contents of a table with known slurs and just throw and error if any are found?

A JOB?!@#!@3

yeah that could have worked too but it's still mostly on him for even reaching that level of foolishness. Also the slur came up on audio, not text, making it a lot harder to moderate automatically like you suggested.

Sorry for any spelling mistakes as isn't my native tongue.

no way🤯

to be fair, a similar song was posted earlier than that and was in single charts, which contained slur and all, why not ban him then?

expressing creativity???

t was an open contest. Open means for all ways of creating music. There will be other contests too but this one was open and this has been communicated from day one.

hello mods

hi mod

What yito said. Last year already made it pretty much evident audiotool is only doing this for the sponsor
People won categories using stems made off site and never came back after the fact
Even if people picked favorites it doesn't matter lol ignore the fact that they won not using audiotool
less than 5% of this entire community can even actually mix their own tracks to a professional standard
Even less even have a fanbase/monetized music off site so the original prizes prior to the backlash into changing the reward for winning make even less sense for audiotool users.
It makes zero sense to allow people to just win actual prizes because they dropped some samples and "used" the site. Yet here we are
At this point just allow us to email audiotool directly to submit anything so we don't have to go through any hoops related to uploading samples and agreeing to the TOS of probe
less steps easier to submit full tracks
It's pointless in arguing because audiotool is already encouraging this.
embrace it or leave