Which then gets me thinking about direct vs indirect manipulation. Which then distracts me from eating my breakfast.
Which is why this piece of UI is rather counter-intuitive, and it's obvious the author hasn't ever really used any other software with knob controls.
But even then, I kinda think knob controls aren't very user-friendly either way. I can sort of understand their usage in software synths as a skeuomorph, but that's about it.
I realized this was a mistake when I gave my app to friends to test and had to stop myself from saying "no! you're moving the knob wrong!" and went back to the drawing board :)
I actually thought that part was kinda nice in allowing me to make either quick large changes or small incremental changes. But then again, I'm not your average interwebs user, so I probably would be aware of the same issue if actually implementing it.
the same idea would help with getting exactly 100 or 0 values - if moving back set the "zero" zone between 0 and about -10, or going the other way once you hit 100 you need to progress significantly past it, say to about 10, before it wraps value
Now, if I click on an area of the circle that is far from the pointer, perhaps it should snap. But if I'm close (or on top of the pointer), snapping is undesirable.
(compare to a physical knob, which is the thing being emulated here: touching the knob does not change the input, you must touch and then move)