NicolaiB

I doubt people were intending to say it like that, instead they wanted to express that all this commotion is over a video game and not one of life's bigger issues.

An order by a moderator is an order just as a cop will arrest you if you do something he told you not to do regardless of the legality and you have no right to resist that arrest or object to the arrest at the time, you'll have to file a complaint after the arrest. Applying that on here. You have to follow orders by moderators even if you believe that they aren't written down anywhere or if you disagree with it. You're not exempt from this just because you disagree with the rules. You can however contact us about it if you believe it's wrong. We can compare GMC with LCPDFR in the way a normal petrol engined car works as opposed to how a electric powered car works and how a hybrid car works. LCPDFR used to be a "petrol engine", our main focus was LCPDFR as a modification with a few peripheral activities. Your website was a "electric engine", it was focused on car modding, it was a platform for car modders to share their work with users and other modders. GMC weren't the same size as LCPDFR, it didn't have the same activity, fewer mods were submitted, fewer gallery images were submitted and fewer posts were made. Those factors mean that you could focus a lot more on certain issues and implementing features, changes and other infrastructure that addressed those issues without being cornered about other issues. LCPDFR right now now is a "hybrid powered car", we still have the old Petrol engine, LCPDFR as a modification is still a thing. You could also argue that with 110k members, we "sell more cars" which means that we need to ensure that the car takes everyone's desires into consideration. You have to do that if you're building a Ford Focus, but you don't have to do that if you build a Pagani or another limited build car because there's fewer "buyers" to consider. But we also have the electric engine, being a more general modding oriented part of the community. We can't engineer "our car" in the same way you would engineer a electric car or a conventional combustion engine car. We can replace the fuel tank with one that can hold 2 litres and put in batteries so the electric engine can run for longer, but the petrol engine can't run for much. We want both engines to run to their fullest potential at the same time. That's our problem, LCPDFR.com isn't focused on any specific part of IV modding, it's several different components in the same place, people don't come here "just" for LCPDFR or "just" for car/script/sound mods. They come here for both. We have to find a balance, we have to walk the tight-rope between addressing issues that affects one part of the community without alienating, restricting or otherwise affecting another part of the community negatively. We can't do that right right now, we can't find a solution when one side is firmly arguing that the only way to deal with the issue is their way and that they won't accept any other way and that they will do whatever they want to do regardless of the outcome. We are willing to work on the issue, we are willing to find reasonable solutions, but we're told that the only way to fix the issue is to do things in a certain way, otherwise it wont work and everything will be "back to normal". EDIT: Just read the final section about our rules. Yes, the rules are too vague. The new ones will be much clearer, we'll try and make them even clearer if there's still some confusion. I expect to have the final draft cleared by the rest of the staff later today. I'll post it out here tonight or tomorrow before they are implemented so we can clear any confusion, misunderstandings and concerns before they are put in place.

Boise PD actually talked about that issue in a video they did about their new cars: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ys0qZ9fK1ME BPD plans on saving "between $1500 and $2000 every time the manoeuvre is used compared to the CVPI"

That's what I thought. I forgot to mention that you can open visualsettings.dat with notepad, right click on the file (it's in GTA IV > Common > Data), click "open with" and select notepad.exe.

It doesn't happen in ELS V7, but I'm assuming that V7 does not work for you. Before V7, ELS lights used two different settings in a file called "visualsettings.dat", the lights are "turned off" (as in they're not lit up, they still "flash") if the engine is switched off. You can fix it if you edit a setting called "car.defaultlight.emissive.off" in "visualsettings.dat". Replace the numbers with the same number that's used in the line above. That way ELS lights will be as bright when the engine is turned off as they are when it's turned on. You can also avoid shutting off the engine if you press "f" to get out instead of holding it in when you want to exit a car.

What version of ELS are you using?

This weeks videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7-tl9RJvkw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXarT0YB-ts https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRqav9-GiX4

It's difficult to take the complaints serious if people don't give suggestions because they believe we won't listen. Those that "complain" seems to only want to make us look bad or prove a point, there's little will from them to actually follow up on it when we try and do something, the clearest example was the post Iconography linked to a couple of pages ago, I asked for input in late October where issues like theft, questions or concerns about all rules could have been brought up, either in that public thread or in a PM. I'm also noticing in this thread that the responses seem to change focus once we bring up something concrete, I tried explain the suggested rule so it was clearer what how it was intended, but the focus in the replies changed away from it to addressing a different issue. Accusations are covered in our guidelines under abuse, discrimination or obstruction: Why are the accusations covered there, particularly in obstruction? By now it's more than "just" accusations, it's getting to the point where a small group of users are making a determined effort to interfere with the community the site in general, they don't follow orders given to them by moderators. A vast minority of these users circumvent the sanctions we imposed. That's a much, much bigger issue. Nobody has made an effort to contact us before or after the situation escalated, nobody contacted us and asked for clarification about the rules. Nobody tried to address their concerns to us after they were told that we couldn't' do anything about the gallery issue, anyone involved could have contacted me, Sam or any moderator if they had concerns about the way we dealt the issue, you could have asked exactly how we interpret the rules as it looked like we had different views on them. Some of you have me, Sam or other staff members on Steam, Skype or other IM clients, we all have PM inboxes, we've made public announcements where we asked for input, I'd think that would at least show at least a little indication from our side about addressing issues and concerns about the site. Those involved wanted to do the accusations in public, you even touched on that subject. I could argue that we're in public here, that dealing with this in public is what those involved wanted from the beginning. It's only a problem when accusations fly towards those that engaged in the issues Sam addressed in the first post. You justify violating the guidelines because we don't' listen, you justify not contacting us because we wouldn't care anyway if you did. Until now, the approach has been to deliberately cause as much problems on here as possible. Our suggestions are either shot down or the subject changes to a different thing as soon as we try and actually do something that actually would address at least some parts of the issues talked about. Nobody has seemed to acknowledge my earlier points where I described the situation in-depth or even paid any attention to our concerns about the issues. Nobody replied or quoted anything from those posts, nobody accepted or acknowledged anything we've said. It's either rendered useless or the subject is changed. We don't expect every member to take everyone else into consideration. That's what the Community Team is here for. We expect people to understand that and agree to at the very least attempt to understand that and understand that it will affect how we address issues. We cannot get anywhere until there's some common understanding and agreement that everything here could have been handled differently. But I'm getting more and more concerned that some of those that are involved aren't here to actually address the issues they claim to address. Sam, me, and everyone on CT, management and development team is here because we DO want LCPDFR to be a good place, we care about LCPDFR and we want to make it as good as it can be. We didn't ban anyone right away or apply "harsh sanctions" because it would only deteriorate the situation more, we've only taken action and issues suspensions when literally everything else we did to address it were ignored. Before we get anywhere we need to agree on a few things. That from now on we'll all focus on addressing the issues instead of arguing over the past We need to agree that the solutions we find will actually be something that works, as opposed to empty gestures. Most of all, we need to agree that the rules MUST be followed, that instructions given by moderators MUST be followed, regardless of you agree with it. It doesn't' mean that we can't talk about the rules, at least so we can take care of any misunderstandings or possibly get input that will help us see a issue in a different way. We can't change everything overnight, we can do some changes relatively soon, but some things may have to wait, we can find a temporary solution that will be in effect until a permanent solution can be put in place.

That particular image has 1 report, it was reported by a moderator who wanted input about how he should handle the comments in question. The comments on the image in question were disabled completely, something we've done several times before when the comments on a image consistently violated community guidelines, the violation in this particular incident concerned "Obstruction, circumvention and interference": None of those that commented were issued with any warnings or any sanctions.

Which you could do by sending a polite PM to the user before taking it up in a public fora. @Will, the user requested the image to be removed which we complied with so I can't find the date of upload in the album it was uploaded to, I'd appreciate it if Jewish_banana could tell me roughly when it was uploaded as I can only see 10 reports per page in our reports system, it'd take me quite a while to dig though all gallery reports from the past three months.

Just to clarify about the user, he requested to have his profile removed so we deactivated it. Take that as you will, maybe he was tired of getting accused or maybe he knew that he couldn't get away with it any more. Take that as a small victory if you will. I also think it's worth noting that the user in question posted more images as the amount of accusations increased, there was a noticeable drop after a couple of images didn't generate any attacks. That's partly why we said to ignore the images because a part of the whole situation, including ripping and uploading mods with ripped models is only done so they can get attention, it doesn't seem to matter if it's good or bad as long as they get attention. Telling you guys to ignore it wasn't meant as a permanent solution, but it would calm everything down so we had more time to work on the underlying issues. Back to the rules.I want to be as honest as I possibly can, that's why I said that we can't apply certain changes because we know what we can and can't enforce, we can't say that ripping is not allowed because we can't verify that, but we can verify permission issues. Which includes ripping. We can clarify exactly what constitutes "permission" in the rules if it isn't clear enough on that particular issue. I do agree that those of us that has spent a lot of time on our models can notice suptle differences or similarities, I made a minor adjustments the wheels on my Charger last night and it loosk completely different now, but most users wouldn't notice, even I would struggle to notice small changes like that on a model I didn't have much, if any experience with. It's a bit like your own home, you'd notice immediately if your house or flat was burgled, even if they didn't break windows or thrash the place. You'd notice that the rug was 2 cm more to the right or that you didn't leave the kitchen door open wide, that the potted plant in the window was turned the other way. A police officer wouldn't, he doesn't know the place as well as you do, he has to dust for finger-prints before he can confirm that something isn't right. The unfortunate thing about the gallery is that we can't do our version of dusting for fingerprints, we'd rely on the "burglar" to dust his own prints for us (show us the model he used in the image). We'd be back here, arguing over the same thing if we did go after rippers inthe gallery because they showed us a different model that they had permission for, you'd be arguing that it's a compleley different model we saw, that we're clueless and that we're covering for him. That's why I'm saying that a "straight-up" rule against ripping in the gallery can't work. That's not to say that we won't do anything about the gallery, but the problem concening ripped models and theft was limited to very few people, less people posted images that caused accusations than number of people that accused. That changes the problem in our view, or at least the most important problem, the biggest problem (due to the number of people involved) is the accusations, we can deal with the secondary problem (images showing ripped mods or ripping/stealing mods in general) if we can deal with the biggest issue first. It's a bit like asking a police officer to hold down a suspect that's resisting arrest and ask him to search another suspect at the same time, he'll fail to do one or both things. Again, we can work on finding solutions to all the problems, but the solutions has to reflect the scale and severity of the individual issues, we can't send a JDAM at some dirt if we only need to dig five times with a shovel.