Jump to content

theblackman

VIP-Supporter
  • Content Count

    76
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

theblackman last won the day on September 3

theblackman had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

5 Good

About theblackman

  • Rank
    Thane
  • Birthday June 18

Profile Information

  • Location
    New Zealand
  1. We do know the 'reliability' of AFKMods. Arthmoor has been a productive, committed member of the ES modding community for more-or-less two decades now. Longer than the Nexus, I believe. And NM is personally owned as well - by Robin Scott. So your point regarding reliability, with regards AFK at least, is largely irrelevant. Your point about feasibility is pertinent, however, but doesn't it come down to traffic volume? Do we know what the bandwidth limits are and if current traffic volumes are close to exceeding those? Rather than make a decision based on speculation, if would be better to make an informed decision. Is it feasible for STEP to provide some form of limited file hosting, perhaps as a mirror for any files stored on, let's call them, second-tier distributions sites, like those you listed? Likely you'll mention cost as an issue but last time(?) you issued a call for donations, the response was fairly overwhelming, IIRC. Lastly, it has been proposed that the second-tier hosting sites be more-or-less blacklisted due to bandwidth issues except for when they're used by a mod author with a proven track record. That's a tad contradictory. The bandwidth issue exists independent of reputation. I'll refer back to my earlier point - I think STEP should be supporting any responsible, sensible moves to ensure a more diversified mod ecosystem.
  2. Between bulk emails and FB, I'd posit that bulk emails is the lesser of the two evils. In addition to what Tech wrote, I'd tend to view emails from STEP more like a newsletter I've signed up for. You might find that some bulk email services offer a free subscription to non-profits, which means you'll have all the compliance stuff automated, in addition to the features usually included. Just a thought.
  3. z929669 split from unrelated topic Why is that?
  4. On one hand I can't believe we're having this conversation - and that's not a dig at anyone, btw. We've all been a bit spoilt over the past decade or so with NM being the dominant hosting site for mods for Bethesda's game franchises. I remember when (cue collective groans) mod users had to peruse multiple sites (PES, FileFront etc) to get the mods they wanted, although I can't remember if registration for each was mandatory. On the other hand, it is good that we are seeing what users prefer here. However, from various posts on the NM forums and elsewhere, I have noticed an interesting phenomenon which I've termed Nexus Mods Myopia, where: 1. because a mod has been deleted from NM, that mod ceases to exist entirely in the minds of some users; and/or 2. because some mod authors have deleted their mods from NM, that means the modding community is in a hopeless downward spiral. So in the mind of some portion of the community, mods for Bethesda's games exist only on NM and NM constitutes the entire domain of the modding community. I don't think STEP should be taking an action that tacitly entrenches that view. Rather it should be encouraging a more diversified ecosystem which will benefit the entire community rather than tacitly supporting a monopsony. So I agree with z929669. Also, I would've appreciated getting a headsup email about this poll - I'm sure others would too.
  5. theblackman

    Bethini Pie

    Brilliant idea. Looking forward to seeing this develop. Did you learn Python/JSON as part of developing this or did you already know those languages?
  6. Why did you upload it to the Alchemy category? Looks good though! :)
  7. I actually preferred the previous version of the message; it was clear and concise. As it is now, you have to click through two links to see the boilerplate and at first I wasn't sure if that was to be used in the wiki only or the forum post too.
  8. I thought that might be the case, but then I wondered why you would want a DB full of rejected mods. But OK, makes sense, thanks.
  9. When posting a mod suggestion for inclusion into STEP, the 'warning' text states to consider creating a modpage on the wiki for the mod, but no reason is given as to why it might be preferable to do this. Perhaps the reason(s) could be included - it would be more persuasive, at least. Thanks.
  10. Actually I'm not sure the 'norm' was ever the quite the 'norm' we assumed it was. This is the thread (2017) that prompted me to investigate this issue more closely, specifically DoctorKaizeld's comment: "kinda a well-known thing that you don't clean master files". Note that they are specifically referring to LE, not SE, but that doesn't really matter in this context. GrantSP (2018) reaches a similar conclusion here after discussion with other mod authors although he admits "there may be some small benefit for Skyrim to do so". Then there's the anecdotal reports, some linked below: One Two Three The AFKMods discussion was bemusing to me when I first read it when I was researching this as I read Arthmoor's most recent comment to not clean the masters before I read that thread where he is passionately disagreeing with Mator and recommending they be cleaned. Anyway, as we now know that cleaning can cause issues and since we appear to not have any cases of issues caused by using uncleaned masters (assuming correct use of patches), I would say that's fairly conclusive.
  11. IIRC it was in Arthmoor's Reddit post, which I now can't find, but it was the reason I emailed him. He also confirmed it via email to me but as it is personal correspondence I can't cite it. As to why if only using USSEP, no specific reasons were given, just Arthmoor recommending cleaning for 'patchophobes'.
  12. Elminster's amusing summary from one of those GitHub links about Skyrim's DLC:
  13. I can't find any documented instances of users experiencing problems from not cleaning them; perhaps I'm not looking in the right places. But Arthmoor in his Reddit post (which I now can't find but it was about a year old) specifically mentions bug reports to Github as a result of cleaning the masters, and he confirmed this via email. And there's other anecdotal content on various forums matching this. Mator is one of the contributors to xEdit and his view has always been fairly consistent - it's a waste of time, assuming one is using USSEP. There's definitely a clear pattern towards not cleaning them, again assuming USSEP is being used. If it isn't being used then cleaning is recommended. Given all this, perhaps the status quo needs to be taken with a 'grain of salt'. What references do you want, btw?
  14. That's probably a good idea. I looked at the xEdit documentation. There's nothing in there about cleaning the masters other than a clarification point about manually cleaning Dawnguard.esm. There is a link to a 3-year old discussion on afkmods about pros/cons, mostly between Arthmoor (for) and Mator (against). Of course, Arthmoor now agrees with Mator. I've communicated with Arthmoor directly on this in the last few days. He said his view had changed in the last year or so.
  15. Discussion topic: No Grass in Objects by meh321 Wiki Link Accepted for next SE guide version (> 1.0.0) Prevents grass clipping through most objects. Mod performs a raycast in-game from each position where grass is located and if it detects a collision with another object then it doesn't place grass at that point. Needs .Net framework but that's already a requirement for MO2. OCD sufferers rejoice!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.