Slau, since apparently I don't get your humor nor do you seem to
bother going through posts please do a find on where I said, "I do
have both link scroll and edit checked in options. I honestly don't
know where this whole scrubbing thing came up on your part, you
said "Hang on, John, you don't know what I mean by scrubbing in a
track? Have you never scrubbed audio in Pro Tools?"? I had never
mentioned scrubbing before you brought it up. You assumed that I
assumed you didn't know what the difference between scrubbing and
selection is but I was pointing that out to clear it up. That's a lot
of assumption going back and forth. With all of that assumption, why
didn't you assume when one would first set up PT as a blind user, one
would go through all of the menus and linking of insertion and track
selection would be checked rather than the negativity of assuming that
the person is inexperienced. Do you know there are 26 posts on this
and you still never answered my question back in post #2 about is it
possible to select tracks for editing without interacting? You gave
every answer about interacting possibilities but never addressed my
actual question. I even stated Chuck's way and asking if that worked.
You seemed to avoid it and wanted to focus on the subject of scrubbing
which was never even mentioned in my original post and was actually
brought up by you. The closest you came to answering was the
statement "Again, you don't have to interact necessarily" first
you said "again" but that meant nothing in the context of the phrase,
there's no reference to again. Then you went on to say "you don't have
to interact necessarily" what does that grammatically even mean as an
explanation? The very simple statement of "yes, Chuck's way works or
does not" would have saved another 3 posts.
As for couth, wrong again... Since this time I will assume you won't
bother clicking on a link I'll provide it here for you. Couth: showing
or having good manners or sophistication; Word History:
>From as far back as the 16th century and entered webster's dictionary
in 1913. Today's Good Word started out as an independent word, became
a negative orphan, then was revived by 'back derivation' (removing the
un-) fairly
recently. It was originally the past participle of can which in Old
and Middle English meant "know" when used as an independent verb (not
the auxiliary
can : could). Kith, as in 'kith and kin', is a variant of couth and
like today's word originally meant "(those) known". In the 16th-18th
centuries the
meaning of uncouth changed to what it is today and couth was left
behind. Then, at the end of the 19th century, writers began to
resurrect couth as a word
with the opposite meaning of uncouth, first facetiously but more
recently quite seriously. Today it remains a social part of the
English language. I'm sure you may want to debate that with the
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition.
I'd sincerely like to thank all of the members that have helped out in
this group but if there are members trying to correct grammar of which
they can't even take a second to check up on or bother reading posts
throughout and addressing the subject at hand without making it their
own, I can't be part of that. I think everyone needs to remember each
user has specific needs and just as there is a radio person on here, a
live user, studio engineers, musicians etc, I believe a crass
attitude and sarcasm can only create more personal faults for that
individual. Best of luck to all.
