PrimalSavage

@matortheeternal Please call that entity "Digital Modders Conglomerate of America" (DMCA) for the epic lulz.

Brilliant, a mirror leotard w/ integrated weapons of mass destruction :nuke: :nuke:

According to this Website, the NexusMods breach was a fairly big one from a historical standpoint (#11). http://s33.postimg.org/sww01xcpr/Pwned.png I'm sure you guys have taken steps to improve security, but is there any way for me to reset/delete all personal information that you may have about me w/o deleting my account?

Don't log in.

The section sign ( § ) in HTML is § https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_sign Issue may have something to do w/ the URL being translated to HTML. As suggested if you follow the link below, use &sect instead of &sect ? http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/problems.html#amp

This happens from time to time. I would recommend waiting. I believe it has to do with files being distributed across the CDN. e.g. I uploaded three 150 MB files today. #1 at 16:53 #2 at 17:08 #3 at 17:25 #2 was available almost from the get-go. #3 became available about 10 min ago. I'm still waiting for #1 (Thought it might be available now, will have to try again). Anyhow, might be something else, but I would definitely wait a few hours to see if the issue resolves itself.

What if that 5th version is broken? it's not unknown for modders to keep tinkering until they break everything. I can think of several once good mods that are now broken because the modder didn't know when to stop. You make a valid point, but I believe this isn't any different than having endorsed the first iteration only to see the second, third, etc. iteration break the mod. Most users won't come back and remove their endorsements for various reasons. Most users will also not remove an endorsement when a Mod hasn't been updated for a long time and no longer works with the new/patched game version. As to the fifth downloaded iteration (not the fifth iteration per se though in some cases that may be) by one user (or any reasonable number decided by management really), it would only be the turning point where endorsement is added automatically (but can be removed by said user). I think whether modders (and users) like it or not, there is probably a correlation between endorsements and downloads. As with everything, the early adopters (or in this case, the early modders) generally have quite an advantage and there is a snowball effect where users download top ranked mods, endorse top rank mods, and generally end up reproducing some sort of pareto principle where the top 20% Mods end up with 80% of the endorsements. This generally stays true even if some Mods haven't been updated for months (years). The proposition 1. and 2. would help both newcomers and those who've kept working on their mod overcome such situation. As to the label used (endorse) and as a modder, I agree w/ DrakeTheDragon that it probably doesn't matter. However, as a user of Mods, I think pixelhate may be on to something. +1/Like/Thanks are probably easier to give than endorsements, the latter being more intense, for lack of a better word.

Keep clicking on the Stats Tab, the graph should eventually show up. Has been more difficult to get it to show up since Fallout 4 has been out (For me anyway). Seems to be getting better now that it's slowing down (I suppose?).

1. The possibility to re-endorse a Mod after a year if a new version has been uploaded could be a good thing. Would reward continuous development/support. You could also have said information in the endorsement details (written as "number of +2 endorsers", +3, +4, etc.). 2. A second proposition would be to automatically endorse a Mod when a user has downloaded many different versions of said Mod (Say, after the fifth iteration/download). At some point, if someone keeps downloading the same Mod (new version(s)), then endorsement should be presumed/inferred (still removable by the user). Could have an opt-out checkbox (to automatic endorsement after 5th version download) in user options.

Unable to download (CDS) logged in or not. Using Chrome. Ping 33 ms (average).

I obviously agree with what you guys are saying, but why not add a search checkbox along the lines of: "Remove Mods w/ no tags" and/or force Modders to select at least one tag (Even if they're not sure about anything else, they should at least know the language it is in).

Fairly sure it was [game].nexusmods.com/ in June 2013. Anyhow, somewhat irrelevant I guess, other than to say there was a point in time where it was [game].nexusmods.com/ Well, if it's on Google Docs, you should just do CTRL-H and replace skyrim.nexusmods.com/ by www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/ or something along those lines. Basically, just figure out the exact nomenclature change and use CTRL-H to do that change instantly across your 17 pages worth of Skyrim Mods.

Yeah.

Don't log in.

Seeing Thandal screenshot made me think how nice of a feature "View your files download history" would be (Basically: who downloaded your Mods). Regarding the question at hand, I agree that knowing exactly which file you downloaded from the Mod page would be nice.

About corrupted files issue: I re-uploaded my mod files after Dark0ne post and that fixed it for me. Can't say if that will work for everyone, but worth a try if you are a modder and are having the issue.

I had this issue (Corrupted files) after uploading a new version of my mod yesterday (Around 9 PM EST). Today, I re-uploaded the files (under a new version: 1.8e.1 instead of 1.8.e.) around 4 PM EST (So 3-4 hours ago) and everything is working fine now. So corrupted files should probably be uploaded again.

@Thandal Anything about the issue tomm434 is having (which I'm also having) and which is about newly updated/uploaded files? Is this being looked into?

Just uploaded a number of new files and having the same issue. All files are 106 Kb and when trying to open them, says "The Compressed (zipped) Folder ... is invalid"

Is there a way to see the list of users who have downloaded my mod? EDIT: Guess not. Even if it would only be the last 500, that would be a good start...

On some Nexus Sites, Files of the Month is clearly suffering from the same inherent problem Endorsement had before reminders were put in. That is, very few users vote. (e.g. Fallen Enchantress hasn't had Files of the Month since April 2014). Wondering here if an Endorsement could automatically count as a Vote for the month it is given in. Alternatively1, maybe a Vote reminder that pops up at the same time and in the same window as the Endorsement reminder. Alternatively2, maybe a Vote reminder that pops up the first time you log in during the last week of the month.

I removed the readmes myself: didn't want to leave an empty tab. I did open a ticket (July 12), didn't get a reply but I was finally able to upload readmes (July 14). The only thing that changed between the 12th and the 14th was my preferences getting reset (I didn't do it, so I must assume it was done following my ticket - although I've had my preferences reset on their own before).

Thanks for testing it. I guess it's time to open a ticket...

CTRL-F5: Yes, tried. Also tried a different browser that I never use, still getting the error. Just uploaded a test file (ReadMe.txt, UTF-8 ) http://www.nexusmods.com/mods/166/readmes/XtraDeconstruct_readme.txt Anyone seeing it?

Thanks for the reply Aaron. For some reason, no matter what filename I use, the filename gets renamed to: nexusmods.com/mods/166/readmes/ModName_readme.txt . Not sure if this has anything to do with my problem. I usually do the ReadMe w/ Notepad, which by default seems to use ANSI, but I've also tried UTF-8 to no avail. True that the site has been quite busy but: 17:26, 11 Jul 2014 Readme removed17:26, 11 Jul 2014 Readme added15:50, 11 Jul 2014 Readme removed15:50, 11 Jul 2014 Readme added16:37, 10 Jul 2014 Readme removed16:37, 10 Jul 2014 Readme added1:20, 10 Jul 2014 Readme added22:10, 9 Jul 2014 Readme removed22:10, 9 Jul 2014 Readme added17:02, 9 Jul 2014 Readme added17:02, 9 Jul 2014 Readme removed17:01, 9 Jul 2014 Readme added12:15, 5 Jul 2014 Readme added18:48, 4 Jul 2014 Readme added18:46, 4 Jul 2014 Readme added14:26, 3 Jul 2014 Readme added14:25, 3 Jul 2014 Readme added14:25, 3 Jul 2014 Readme removed3:03, 3 Jul 2014 Readme added3:03, 3 Jul 2014 Readme removed3:01, 3 Jul 2014 Readme added3:01, 3 Jul 2014 Readme removed1:49, 3 Jul 2014 Readme added1:49, 3 Jul 2014 Readme removed1:45, 3 Jul 2014 Readme added1:44, 3 Jul 2014 Readme removed1:39, 3 Jul 2014 Readme added1:38, 3 Jul 2014 Readme removedAt this point, I've put the ReadMe in a forum post, though I would obviously prefer to use the ReadMe tab.