dferstat

Many thanks. I've now submitted this via the Vortex Feedback service (which, by the way I consider a brilliant idea).

The question is not whether a dev has seen my feature request. The problem is that, on a forum that says it's for feature requests, no dev has replied, so I can't tell what, if anything, is happening to my request.

I'm sorry, but it's been a week with no reply from anyone. Could I please have a dev advise if they think that this is reasonable or do-able?

Background: I lost track of a Fallout 4 companion some weeks ago. I should have reverted my saves then, but I was badly bitten by the settlement construction bug. I've now saved this work, and handed it off via Transfer Settlements to a new toon for completion. I now want to go back through my succession of save game file to when I last had the companion, and resume my game from there, deleting subsequent files. The problem: Inside Vortex, I can find a save game with the companion present, because she's pictured on the thumbnail. I now want to search through the subsequent saves to where she disappears. The problem I have is in trying to find the right saves from inside the game. Now, Vortex shows me a "save game ID" (presumably the number of times I've saved the game) and it shows the creation time of the file. However, inside the game, the load game menu only shows me the time I've been playing the toon, in days, hours and minutes. Yes, it's possible to see the same thumbnails that Vortex shows, but this is very laborious, especially as Fallout 4 only shows you 3 saves at a time. Proposed solution: Could we please have the time played (for games that store this in their saves) added to the info displayed for each save in Vortex? It would make it much easier when trying to match saves in Vortex with saves in-game.

There's also DeadPool2099's Bullpup Bozar (nexusmods.com/fallout4/mods/28478).

Way to go. Imply that site management are lying. You're really trying to make friends, aren't you?

Hmm ... how do you stand on the the old test of shouting 'Fire!" in a crowded theatre? Do you hold for free speech, even when such speech is objectively harmful? How do you stand on incitement to violence, perjury, food labelling, slander, and the manipulation of stock prices?

StormWolf01 and HeyYou say:

Except, of course, that they don't. I keep asking you, and StormWolf01, to provide some evidence to support your claims. You two keep not doing so. If my statements, as you insist, are factually incorrect, then PROVE IT.

No need. I think I made my point clear enough. It's probably too far back for you to remember, but this thread started with people wondering WHY the mod in question was hidden. In my post, I owned to my contributions, and gave my reasons for doing so. Since then, you've continued to make statements that are objectively incorrect. Because your statements have the power to misinform others, and to reinforce dangerous myths, I've taken the time to rebut them. And no, I don't expect to change your mind; you've demonstrated that you're impervious to logic, or to new facts that don't fit your world-view. However, I want those people who still have an open mind to see the evidence, in the hope that, once informed, they'll reach conclusions based upon fact, rather than lies.

Ahhhhahahahahaha!! The maga hat comment FINALLY comes out! I was really wondering how long it would be before the true colors really started to show. Lets see, you start off by coming into a thread that was relatively calm and peaceful....and announce that you'd reported the mod, because it was making gays, lesbians, trans, and all the rest of the alphabet feel insecure, or oppressed, so as to automatically make yourself a target in the thread. S Throw out a link, that when fact checked, shows you didn't read very far into it, and didn't see that it actually hurts your cause more than supports it. J Hop up on the soap box about how the world hates, discriminates, and persecutes a group that so far, you have made no inclination of being a part of. Who may or may not want you standing up for them. Telling people that they don't know what they're talking about, because their facts don't match yours. Preaching at people about things that are going on in their country, that you don't know anything about, because you don't live there. And what you do throw out, people that do live there, know right away that you haven't gotten any actual experience of what you're talking about. W And then, when all riled up, because the parroted rhetoric gets worn out and fails, you fall right into the old standby of the maga hat. Which, is an ideal about bigotry, racism, pretty much each and every evil that can be thought up. Your whole standpoint was that you are offended by a t-shirt. And then you make accusations about somebody wearing a hat. I think ya just kicked your soapbox out from under yourself. Personally, I'd recommend bowing out, while you've still got at least a bit of ground left to stand on. Especially since now you're worked up to the point of cussing and making accusations at people. Rather amusin' this. I wonder; how careless (or is that insecure) do you have to be to reply to your own post? :) The MAGA seemed (and still seems) a reasonable conclusion. Whenever I provide supporting evidence for my statements, you, almost always, 1) completely ignore it, 2) insist that it's worthless, and/or 3) completely mis-represent it. You, on the other hand, have completely failed to provide any support for your statements (I'm unable to describe them as arguments). You continue to ascribe to me motivations I do not hold, despite my protestations, and, again, with a lack of any evidence. You condemn your media organisations, again without any evidence. You fail to condemn people, and organisations, whose long-established policies and practices any right-thinking person SHOULD condemn. You would be hard pressed to act more like Trump, or a Trumper, if you tried.

Why the hell do I have to live in your country to know your laws? There's such a thing as an Internet, you know, designed for the dissemination of information across borders. Fact 1: There is, currently, no US Federal Law barring employment discrimination on the basis of sexuality or gender. Fact 2: In the absence of a Federal bar, some states (but not all) have enacted laws prohibiting such discrimination. California, for example, has passed some of the stronger laws. Fact 3: In states where there are such anti-discrimination laws, yes, some employees have been able to sue their employers in case of breach of State law. Fact 4: In those states which have NOT passed such laws, people ARE getting fired for not being heterosexual. Again, all of this is established fact. Your ignorance, or denial, of it, does you no credit. Really? Examples, please, or I call bovine stuff. Oh dear. Oh dear, oh dear oh dear. Does your tinfoil hat fit under your MAGA cap? In the spirit of enquiry, I wonder if your scepticism extends to Fox News. Our respective governments tell us that Australia and the US are friends. I dunno about your friends, but I'd consider any friend of mine who had the courage to tell me that I was making a mistake to be a good friend. A friend who let me continue making mistakes wouldn't be much of a friend at all. Alternatively, consider this: the US holds itself as a paragon, and as a world leader, in human rights. You say you're the good guys. Isn't it time you acted like it?

You are (I think deliberately) mis-representing the issue. As I, and others, have previously observed, gay pride is about an oppressed minority (and no amount of weasel words can make this not so) re-affirming their sense of self-worth. Straight pride is most definitely not the same. Straight pride is, unmistakably, about re-affirming prejudice, and intimidating a minority. Why would anyone wear a t-shirt referencing killing homosexuals if they DIDN'T intend to intimidate? C.mon, think about it. If you're on the same side as Nazis, and the KKK, you KNOW you've taken a wrong turn somewhere. Incorrect. The Equality Act has passed the House of Representatives in May 2019, and arrived at the Senate the same month. Until it passes the Senate, and survives a potential Presidential veto, it is NOT law. The White House announced in August 2019 that, while it opposed discrimination, it considers that the bill contains "poison pills", so a veto is quite possible. Until such time as it becomes law, there is NO Federal-level bar to discrimination on sexuality or gender. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_Act_(United_States)

I'm sorry, but, yet again, you demonstrate that you simply don't know what you're talking about. There are many jurisdictions in the US that offer no protection against being fired for being non-heterosexual. Now, I know that you don't believe me, so look here: https://apnews.com/8b5086b09b9042bf808d82108b7d925c and here: https://www.fastcompany.com/90369004/lgbt-employee-protections-by-state-map-shows-where-gay-workers-can-be-fired and again here: https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/can-you-be-fired-being-gay-answer-depends-largely-where-n962711 Please, don't try claiming that NBC and Associated Press are "left wing"; you're only embarrassing yourself. There are a variety of Federal and State laws that restrict the right to refuse service. Again, I know you won't believe me. So try these: https://blogs.findlaw.com/free_enterprise/2019/06/5-tips-for-refusing-service-to-customers.html https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/the-right-to-refuse-service-can-a-business-refuse-service-to-someone-because-of-appearance https://www.mydoorsign.com/blog/right-to-refuse-service-to-anyone/

The part that I was looking for describes that valid reports are only reports that violate the site rules, and/or violate the laws of the US, or the UK. While I wasn't about to go searching past 1 or 2 pages of the Wall of Shame, there are definitely members listed there for reporting mods that they didn't agree with, with the intention of trying to get said mods removed from the site. If you really do want to read more into what documentation may or may not exist I'd recommend contacting one of the Community Leaders and see if they have a link that they can provide. While I haven't had direct contact with some of the Community Leaders, I can say that they do directly work for Robin, the site owner. "Feels" do not matter when reporting a mod. So, No, that is not what the report mod button is for. Only to report a mod that breaks one of the rules or laws stated above. This, is to protect the site against any backlash of illegally hosting materials which cannot be shared over the internet, by the Nexus, as the Nexus is not an authorized distributor of copyright material. I can honestly say that many such reports get filed to the staff, when a new "nazi" mod gets released and in most cases, a more professional version of that response is what is given by the staff. And while Most, if not all of the staff abhor the atrocities committed by the nazi party, and highly sympathize for those who have suffered from them, there is no law against it in the US or the UK. A) Did you read the part on that wiki page where the biblical reference was contested? Again, I do not accept wiki as a tried and true fact, however, on that very page, it is contested that the verse is misquoted. Cherry picking eh? If that wiki page was your defense as to why the mod was offensive, I don't think you're following your own advice there. B) Sweeping statements were made so as not to put words into the mouths of members of staff, or to speak for them. However, the statement still holds true. Any experienced member of a forums staff, network IT staff, Site administrative staff, Or game server staff can verify this. Previous experience. I do also know that the site administrators have always been quite adept at reading between the lines. 2) ONLY if you are willing to go the extra mile and not believe what you read, without checking further into it, as well as checking into the references which were used to see if they are credible or not. Yeah, that mod was definitely memorable. As were some of the people defending the side opposing it. I honestly wish I'd made screenshots of some of the comments that shot back and forth from the posting pages of the mod. On that note, I was referring to your recent posting history, not in the mod this thread regards. Apologies for the confusion there. And yes, that advice was offered in good will. Except that I didn't report the mod just because I found it offensive. Go back to my first post in this thread: "Heterosexual pride is a slogan often used to denigrate LGBTQ beliefs, and to intimidate LGBTQ people ..." Now, the Reporting Guidelines page (https://help.nexusmods.com/article/21-reporting-guidelines) does, indeed, contain the text you quote. However, if you check the File Submission Guidelines (https://help.nexusmods.com/article/28-file-submission-guidelines) you'll see this class of inappropriate content: "Content that may be generally construed as provocative, divisive, objectionable, discriminatory, or abusive toward any real-world individual or group, may be subject to moderation. This includes but is not limited to content involving politics, race, religion, gender identity, sexuality, or social class." I did NOT report the mod just because I didn't like it. I reported the mod because I believed that it breached the guidelines for the Nexus. Given that the moderators have hidden or deleted the file, I must conclude that it's likely they agree with me. A) The bible quote wasn't contested, or misquoted. The Wikipedia page has only one paragraph referring to the bible quote. Here it is (reproduced in full): ' In 2010, in response to suicides amongst gay adolescents, an Ally Week was held at St. Charles North High School in St. Charles, Illinois. On the first day of this Ally Week, though, three students arrived wearing "Straight Pride" t-shirts. The back of these t-shirts displayed "Leviticus 20:13", a verse stating that men who perform homosexual acts should be put to death. While the school did not force the students to remove their t-shirts, it did persuade them to remove the Bible quotation. The following day two different students arrived wearing "Straight Pride" t-shirts minus the Bible quotations and were consequently asked to remove their shirts. In an opinion piece on the St. Charles incident, Eric Zorn (a staff writer for the Chicago Tribune) opined that "the expression 'Straight Pride' can only be read as a gratuitous and contemptuous response to the suggestion that gay people not be marginalized." ' The court case that you're thinking about was for a separate case, 9 years earlier, that did not feature quotes from the Bible. It's actually the paragraph immediately before the one I reproduced above.

No, it's NOT my interpretation. It's the considered judgement of an increasing number of people. As far as giving a "minority more rights than anyone else", consider these unpleasant truths: In the US, there are jurisdictions where it is legal to fire someone, or refuse to employ them, if they're gay. In far too many countries in the world, simply being gay is a criminal offense; in a number of particularly backwards ones it's a capital crime. To say that this minority has "more rights" than the majority is a gross lie.

Let's address your points more-or-less in order. 1) various I started my contribution to this thread to explain just why I not just disliked, but disapproved of, the original mod. I wanted people to understand just what it was about the original mod that made it offensive to so many. Against site rules to report something as offensive? I'm sorry, but this is just so much bovine stuff. Why the flying fruitbat does the site give us the option to report content to moderators if we can't use it to report that which we find offensive? Given that no moderator has complained about my actions, I must presume that I haven't broken any rules. Pretty educated words? It's all relative, I guess, but I didn't use any words beyond the average level of a senior Australian high school student. As far as remembering three weeks back goes, please bear in mind that the original mod was quite memorable (not, sadly, in a good way) and my post was quite brief. For me, it's no great feat to remember the gist. 2) Wikipedia, for all its faults, is an excellent starting point for research, especially as the better pages are copiously annotated and referenced. Given that, these days, almost everybody is on the Internet, criticising Wikipedia because it's fact checked "by people on the Internet" is non-sensical. You mis-understand legal precedent. Just because a judge in Minnesota, in 2001, declared "Straight Pride" to be protected free speech does not mean that another, or later, court, in Minnesota or elsewhere, would agree. You also misunderstand jurisdiction. The Minnesota verdict only holds sway in Minnesota, and carries no legal weight elsewhere. You also misunderstand the effect of civil law on sites such as Nexus. The Nexus is private property, and is not legally bound to protect free speech. Just look at the behaviour of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, et al; these have all, at times, censored the content of their users, and usually for reasons that appear quite arbitrary. Nexus management has every right to hold the behaviour of its users to a higher standard that required by law. 3) I don't live on the fora. I check the main site daily, but the fora infrequently. I hadn't posted on this thread earlier because I didn't know about it. In a collegiate mood, I'll give you some advice. A) Try actually reading what other people write, instead of assuming, and/or cherry-picking. I know that you looked at the Wikipedia page. In that article, you'll see that "straight pride" has been used by the KKK, who are not, despite what Trump declared, very fine people. You'll also see that the slogan has been (very closely, as in, on the same garment) associated with Biblical verse calling for the killing of homosexuals. B) Also, try to cut down on the sweeping statements ("Nobody takes credit for making a report ...", "Most internet related business people ...", etc). Arguments using sweeping statements tend to fall over when you rely upon them. If I recall correctly, I didn't post on the mods page; I found the content to be so rebarbative that I saw little point. Instead, I reported it direct to the moderators, using functionality on the site.

No, that's what you're (mis-)interpreting the site admin's decision as. The slogan "gay pride" is intended to make a minority, who can be quite objectively described as oppressed and discriminated against, feel happier about themselves. The slogan "heterosexual pride" (or "straight pride") is intended to reinforce the prejudices of those members of the majority who actively discriminate against the afore-mentioned minority, and to make those in the minority unhappy, and afraid. There is no equivalency.

Here's what I wrote, more-or-less verbatim, when I reported the mod as offensive: "Heterosexual pride is a slogan often used to denigrate LGBTQ beliefs, and to intimidate LGBTQ people. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straight_pride" So, yeah, I think there's good reasons for the mod to be deleted.

... the catch is, I'm looking for one where the wings and rotors are in the landing/take-off configuration. In other words, the rotors are in the horizontal plane, while the wings and engine nacelles point up. I know that Homemaker, and some other mods, feature vertibird statics, but the ones I've seen have the wings in flight mode, or folded, or missing. Any assistance would be welcome.

As the people on the Vortex support forum argue that my problem is not Vortex-related, I'm cross-posting it here. Let me preface my post by saying that I'm enjoying Vortex, and find it a great aid in my play with Skyrim SE and Fallout 4. I'm getting frustrated, however, trying to install scenery mods in F4. I've tried 3 different mods that add settlements to the Coast Guard station, and each either fail to display all their own content, and/or fail to disable all the vanilla content. I've installed the (very enjoyable) America Rising, and where it creates a new North Boston Police Station, it fails to completely remove the vanilla scenery from that location. Lastly, I've installed the Diamond City Expansion, and, when I stand outside Public Occurrences, I can see scenery flickering in and out as I look around. I have, as far as i can tell, got Fallout 4 set for modding. I have the magic lines: [Archive] bInvalidateOlderFiles=1 sResourceDataDirsFinal= in my Fallout4Custom.ini, which is here: C:\Users\User\Documents\My Games\Fallout4 Can anyone please tell me what I've missed? As background, the three files from Diamond City Expansion are copied to the FO4/Data folder, suggesting that Vortex is doing its job. I was kinda hoping that it was Vortex-related, as I didn't have these problems when I was using Mod Organizer 2 on my laptop a couple of years ago. While my CPU is a rather old (some would say antique) i5-4670, my GPU is a brand-new GTX1650.

Selecting Extension on the menu at the left everything shows as Enabled. However, there's no listing for Archive Invalidation. There IS a listing for Gamebryo Archive Invalidation, but as Fallout 4 doesn't use Gamebryo, I suspect this isn't what you mean. The three files from Diamond City Expansion are, indeed, in the Data folder. Looks like Vortex has done its work. Ah, well. Time to schlepp off to the FO4 forums. :smile:

Well, I was kinda hoping that it was Vortex-related, as I didn't have these problems when I was using Mod Organizer 2 on my laptop a couple of years ago. But, ok, I'll try out the FO4 forums. Thanks for your time, guys.

Let me preface my post by saying that I'm enjoying Vortex, and find it a great aid in my play with Skyrim SE and Fallout 4. I'm getting frustrated, however, trying to install scenery mods in F4. I've tried 3 different mods that add settlements to the Coast Guard station, and each either fail to display all their own content, or fail to disable all the vanilla content. I've installed the (very enjoyable) America Rising, and where it creates a new North Boston Police Station, it fails to completely remove the vanilla scenery from that location. Lastly, I've installed the Diamond City Expansion, and, when I stand outside Public Occurrences, I can see scenery flickering in and out as I look around. I have, as far as i can tell, got Fallout 4 set for modding. I have the magic lines: [Archive]bInvalidateOlderFiles=1sResourceDataDirsFinal= in my Fallout4Custom.ini, which is here: C:\Users\User\Documents\My Games\Fallout4 Can anyone please tell me what I've missed?

Thank you very much, FlamingCheeseMonkey! That solution, indeed, does precisely what I need. Kudos awarded! :)