Thank you for your feedback.
I understand that my writing style might appear structured or repetitive—I’ll try to be more concise going forward. That said, I’d like to gently point out that focusing on writing style or the suspected use of tools doesn’t help move the actual topic forward.
To clarify: yes, I do use tools to help organize and clearly express my thoughts—but only as a support, not as a substitute. English is not my first language, so I rely on assistance to ensure my messages are respectful and easy to understand for other participants. I don’t believe using such support is inherently wrong when the goal is constructive and sincere discussion.
Let’s please bring the focus back to the original point: how we should handle consistently-present ETIs in digital tracklists, particularly when they appear in official metadata visible to listeners. This remains a relevant question, regardless of how the message is written.
Oh my god I was having so much headaches reading your posts! 
So, that’s why…
You can stop using that and write simple sentences, even with mistakes, it will be better, I think.
Or simple translator maybe, if you can’t write in English.
One idea, one short sentence.
But without that tool that drowns simple ideas into many dull paragraphs.
10 Likes
@yakumo0209 you can do it, I keep my fingers crossed.
The reason the tools were brought up is they make your posts hard to read. They are literally putting people off from responding to the thread due to that whiff of AI. And I doubt many people will now go back and read all 43 posts. Especially as the AI is so repetitive with its phrases.
It may “technically” be “English”, but it is not forum English as they get a chore to read.
6 Likes
I appreciate the discussion so far, but I feel that the atmosphere here no longer supports a constructive exchange. I’m stepping away from this thread not because I believe my point was invalid, but because I don’t think continuing the conversation in its current form will be productive. I hope the topic can remain open for future consideration, as I believe it still deserves thoughtful discussion.
Agreed - this is one of the reasons why I don’t believe in a 100% copy of how things are listed in the releases.
As noted, digital services will often include “Live Version” type info in titles. or “Album Version” where the physical release doesn’t. In these cases, I don’t believe it’s part of the title (not in the same was a “… remix” is), and would generally put it in the recording disambiguation field.
there are also digital (and physical) release that are clearly mislabeled (I had an example about a month ago, cant remember which).
So, I’m not really in agreement with the original point raised by the OP
5 Likes
