[Guest]

PLEASE READ FIRST!
ok i would like it if this place made its descisions based around what the people here want
This is a very difficult subject for me personly - & i hate upsetting people & it looks as if i have allready trying to decide on what mods are best for the community - please remember that if you say no to vet - we could end end up with mods that half work (i will not have time to chk them all out) at the moment if a mod needs it i will add instructions or an installer before it goes into the mods section to make it easier for the majority - if it is an overwhelming majority to no to vetting then ok we change the site & we go with all mods unchecked by me & AAA team. If you choose yes vet the mods then we carry on the way its going & the AAA team decide on what goes into the mods section & where needed we make the installers easier.

happy voting

[uf_josse]

Clearly yes for me.....

[fly_zo]

for finished Mods i would like the way they are handled now .... IMHO it is the safest way for all users

...and unfinished (test) beta versions can be published via discussion threads.


Z

[RealDarko]

Like Fly Zoo don't know what to vote

[Stuka]

Definitely, yes.

[Guest]

What "Vet Mods" mean? What you will do with them?

[Guest]

if you vote yes - we handle them them exactly the way we are doing right now, which means we chk them out & if needed give them installers & better instructions.

if you vote no - you will get more mods but we will not chk them anymore & will not give them all installers - they will come as we get them - it may mean they dont work properly.

if you choose yes to vetting all mods will still be freely shared here in the mod discussion section

[Username]

Hi Jolly,

Sorry if I sounded bit sharp in the other thread - it wasn't my intention. You hold this place together and are the last person I want to annoy.

I see now what your concern is re the mod downloads section getting deluged with loads of simple mods. If I understand correctly, you prefer these things to be linked to in ordinary mod discussion threads. That's fine by me, I didn't understand the distinction you made between simple mods and more complex ones - but now I do.

So I certainly favour you vetting the mods. My suggested criteria would be:

1) Does the mod attempt to make IL2 more historically accurate in a substantial way?
2) Does the mod provide new content that will never be released by 1C? (with some flexibility on quality until techniques improve).
3) Does the mod function as advertised without wrecking something else?

- if it passes the test then add it to the downloads section.

I know you do this already, but it all depends on how you interpret the first criterion. That's why I queried the decision about the Mig 3 cockpit mod - I like having historically correct cockpits wherever possible, so I would have given it a higher priority and put it on the downloads page. But as ever - these things are just a matter of opinion. :wink:

Anyway, I'm content to trust your judgement and vote Yes to vetting.

[High Plains Drifter]

Yes for sure!! :wink:

[ROSOBORONEXPORTCORP]

I think any improvement to accuracy is worth it. I could see bickering over the word "substantial". Perhaps "reasonable evidence that it improves historical accuracy" would be a better and more challenging criteria to meet?

Btw. I know many people like the installers and that they both take effort to set up and work reasonably well. At the same time I am fairly suspicious of them. My setting keep being reset and I had hand groomed the filelist.txt and organised it with headings before the machine "groomer" took over and undid my work...

[HH_Cipher]

i say Yesh :wink:

[Guest]

Then yes.

[VT-51_Razor]

Definitely YES. There has to be some kind of quality control here.

[Forager]

YES There has to be some quality control and installers are cool.

No vetting= complete chaos here within 3 days.

[Trooper117]

Big yes!