Graybark

Hay anyone been able to successfully assign groups to just the patches to make it work? I end up having to create groups for pretty much every single mod, and I am not done yet. Troublemakers seem to be Improved Closefaced Helmets, Morrowloot Ultimate, Immersive Citizens, and Alternate Start. Honest question here. I would like to know how people with a similar mod list solved this. This is the error without any custom settings:

But how would Vortex know if a mod is "green or red"? It could look at the contents and determine "ok, there is a data subdirectory and no fomod subdirectory so it probably goes to the root" but that doesn't catch enbs, those don't necessarily have a data subdirectory so we need further rules like "ok, there is an enbseries.ini so put it in the root" But that's exactly what we already do. Look at the content and based on some rules try to deduce the mod type. What about mods that do have a Data folder in them but no conventional subfolder? Vortex sometimes put this whole data folder into the Data directory. So you end up with Data\Data\mod files. Is that a bug or something you will not do because of design philosophy?

The result is different. It treats the disabled SSEMerged and Bashed patch differently. That line was just my way of proving that it is indeed Vortex that does it. True. I did not think of that. What about the editing it on start up though?

Is there a way to prevent Vortex from touching plugins.txt at all when auto-sorting is disabled. It still generates a load order when starting it up that slightly differs from how LOOT would sort it. You can tell by the "Automatically generated by Vortex" line. Would be nice if we could disable that startup editing.

LOOT calls it an upcoming feature so I think it is fair to say that it is experimental. I was not aware that the update channels actually did different things since the whole app is still in alpha. That's on me then. I can deal with the issues but some people here are new modders - which begs the question why they are using it in the first place.

Using 0.13 of LOOT in Vortex seems a bad idea to me right now. It makes sorting impossible with certain mods installed without majorly messing with the groups of the plugins involved. Groups is experimental and to force it on people who do not even know how to contribute to the masterlist seems a terrible idea. Then again, I might be missing something. You can read more about it here: https://github.com/loot/loot-api/issues/22 Also, LOOT has not changed. This is not the default LOOT but an experimental version. The decision to use it with Vortex was made by Nexus.

It has and will continue to replace LE for some people.

It might also help to know how you determine that "no mods". Maybe they are active after all and you have not found/seen what the mods do.

May I ask what kind of hardware you have?

This is the most rational thing I've read in this entire thread. I agree with this, as well. Sounds like a very good idea to me.

Something to read: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/why-authors-dont-need-copyright-protection-long-after-death/article25536317/ http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=21037

These two things are directly contradicting each other. "Public Domain" means you forfeit all rights to something. So you are indeed advocating the removal of all rights from mod authors by advocating a public domain position. I believe he was referring to the default setup when uploading a mod. Mod authors who do not care or know about copyright would just leave it like this. People who do care could obviously change it according to their own preference. This could of course put people who might not know about their rights, and who might want to protect their work, at a disadvantage but that's why they need to go through the upload process, anyway.

I'd appreciate it if you didn't make things up that aren't there in the first place; never said anything about you being 'in league' with Mator, in any shape or form - your name was mentioned alongside his as you both responded to that particular post. There is no insult there or slur, so where did you get that idea? Hypersensitive? Maybe you are? But that's not a valid excuse for accusing me of something that I clearly didn't do. I apologize for the confusion. The part about the insults (including my hypersensitivity) was not directed at your post or you. I was just going off on a tangent and addressing some other concerns I had. Oh, Nexus is perfectly able to enforce stuff, and does it from time to time, too. But, perhaps, it was a bad choice of words nevertheless. Still, I wouldn't call public domain premise a draconian enforcement (in practice, it's just the contrary). I understand private property is something like a sacred cow to most, but people have, at the very least, recognize it as such and draw distinct borders. Yeah, I could not get behind that either. And though I am relatively open to collaboration, I would think twice about uploading my mods on the Nexus if I lost the rights to it. I think the way the system it set up right now is pretty good. Everyone can decide for themselves what they do with their mods. I do not see a reason to involve the Nexus in this.

It would be very presumptuous of the Nexus to claim the rights to other people's work. Not even Bethesda does that. Also, the ToS of Bethesda already precludes commercial use. Now, whether the filming of the contents of a mod constitutes public performance is a different matter. The one being discussed here, I suppose.

Nobody is entitled (has the right) to not being called silly as calling someone silly for something or calling an idea silly is in itself an opinion freely expressed. Other than that, I agree that calling someone or someone's idea silly is not a good thing. I would not do it either. I have seen many users on your side of the argument here (you being the notable exception) belittling others, calling them trolls or stupid (in a more subtle manner) for expressing their opinions, however. As you said, such name-calling and belittling is out of bounds. Edit: I am just trying to reach out here, by the way, as I think that the manner in which these things are discussed is really detrimental to the cohesion of the community. I am personally on the fence on some of the things being discussed. I realize that mod authors with a larger user baser have had to deal with a lot of this but I think it is sometimes helpful to look at it from someone's perspective who has not been exposed to this and has genuine concerns (no matter how unfounded).

Reread what my post actually says, where exactly did I state that "failing one makes something instantly not fair use"? Read your post again. That is exactly, literally what you are saying. You (and Mator) are misinterpreting a specific part of what I wrote, based on semantics. Maybe that is my fault for not being concise enough, or perhaps you're both just choosing to interpret it that way - that question arises primarily because of Mator's beliefs when it comes to mod authors asserting their rights. To clarify, I was not stating that failing the first requirement would automatically mean that the video would fail them all and not fall under fair use. So let's be clear. Because of the commercialization of the video, it would be very difficult to meet the first requirement of fair use (note that I don't say impossible) and it would likely fail to be met.* Combined with the fact that the video is unequivocally in breach of the TOS/TOU (of the mod) that MXR initially agreed to when he downloaded & installed the mod, adds more weight to the first requirement not being met, as it (the video) infringes on the copyright of the mod. Said infringement will also have an effect on the outcome of failure/success to meet the criteria of the other requirements (to one extent or another) *bearing in mind that all cases relating to fair use are held on a case by case basis. I maintain that that is exactly what you posted, and that there was no ambiguity in it (4 requirements to be fulfilled, one 'blatantly' failed). If that is not what you meant, then that's even better. Don't want to argue semantics. I would appreciate it if you did not automatically assign a label to me (Team Mator?), and took what I write at face-value. I have seen similar discussions where people are called trolls, stupid etc. for not seeing their point of view. I may be hypersensitive because I am used to an environment where cuss words and rudeness are not seen, but this looks pretty bad to me. People just ganging up on someone because they have a different opinion (not talking about Mator here).

Reread what my post actually says, where exactly did I state that "failing one makes something instantly not fair use"? Read your post again. That is exactly, literally what you are saying.

Hi, I don't know about your and Mator's history but to an uninitiated observer this looks like you are abusing your power as the site owner in this instance. As far as I can tell, he did not say anything that would warrant censorship. If he did try to get a rise out of me, as you may have good reason to claim, I think hiding someone's posts should come from the place you have as an authority here on the forums and not because he is trying to pester you.

I did not even see anything fuzzy :D

What other mods did he create?

Will the people who are working from all other locations still be with us?

Must be a troll. It would be very sad otherwise.

Great interview and mod. Thanks a lot!

Because porn sells better than poop.

In response to post #47378620. #47381125, #47382375, #47382860, #47383605, #47383890, #47384455, #47385670, #47386165, #47387535 are all replies on the same post. Nexus Mod Enabler :D