Site Feedback

[Evaloves4]

> I do not know what is happening in posting in the Blog section. Two times the site cut off part of my lines in two posts . The last one happened after I pressed "Enter".

[slice13]

Looking at the Guidelines, I have a question about rule number 13 - and I have to ask if this rule is still in effect. I'm not questioning the rules, but my understanding of it because I'm a person who learned English as my second language - as such, my weird writing style; apologies in advance for it.

 

"13. We are a free and open community; members requiring payment for mods, support, or putting anything behind a paywall will be removed without warning. Donation buttons/links to support an author is fine, so long as nothing is promised, given, or rewarded other than a sense of satisfaction for supporting an author or owner of the content."

 

So, my understanding is: if you shared a mod here and completed it -> you're required to post it (or a way to get it) that's free and open, as per this rule. 

Like, you don't want people to get free advertising for their patreon/paywall here. 

 

I've been browsing some older topics in "Adult Gaming" forum. There are some members that post previews for mods when they're working on it. So far so good, as an incomplete mod can't really be "released" (though some members ask for help and post their progress). Later, the same members post previews of the completed mods and then also link to their patreons/paywall. A little later, there are other members asking about when the mod was getting released for the public and they get no response. The modder never replies in that topic. Effectively, the message I'm seeing is "if you don't pay, you're not getting it." This goes against rule 13, right? Like, it's a completed mod that the modder, who is a member, but the mod is paywalled.

 

For the most part, I'm looking at the process/progress of mods being created for a new game. Often, not much is posted to discuss the creation and the members skip to the result. Cheers to the little "1 week later" time markers to point out time passing at a glance.

Overall, I'm not about to point specific fingers to the members. I'm not a real modder - despite my efforts in Yakuza 0 that one time - so I'm like a weirded out spectator. Also, again, I'm not here to question the rules or anything; I'm just trying to get some info straight because I'm a big dumb dumb.

 

On the next thing I kind of noticed: I haven't seen any leaks, personally - because the topics I'm browsing are old enough - but sometimes, there is evidence of someone posting a paywalled mod that was shown off earlier in the topic. This resulted in an argument that happened and then argument was deleted...? It was weird and I am guessing that happened based on some left over messages that weren't deleted that came afterwards... but anyway, the member with the paywalled mod "won" despite going against rule 13.

 

This is effectively where my understanding of rule 13 comes into question a second time because the way I comprehend it, I expected the mod and the modder (who paywalls stuff) should be removed. Also, yes, the member who leaked the paywalled mod gets penalized; that makes sense because what they did was wrong (breaking rules 1, 2 and 7). But that's not what happens. The member who broke rule 13 gets their way and that's that. Like... uh... does rule 1 supersede rule 13? If it does, then what if the leaker is also a modder (I can't confirm that they were, but I'm just wondering about the hypothetical).

 

For the record: the old mods are still paywalled to this day, and the modder shows up in later topics (like, a sequel to the game) and does the same thing. Again, I'm not gonna point fingers; that's not why I'm here. 

 

Am I not understanding rule 13 correctly or something? I feel like I'm missing something. This site is like around a decade old while I'm fairly new here and I don't frequent this site much, so uh... Thank you for your time reading this. Have a nice day!

 

 

Post Note to be clear:

1) This is not a situation where the mod belongs to someone not on this site - as the rule specifically states "members requiring payment for mods" - so that's a different topic. 

2) Mods that are temporarily behind a paywall - like "pay and you can get it early!" seem to be fine here (despite my understanding of rule 13) - but what I saw is a situation where it's simply "Paywalled. Period. You're not getting this without paying."

[Psalam]

1 hour ago, slice13 said:

Looking at the Guidelines, I have a question about rule number 13 - and I have to ask if this rule is still in effect. I'm not questioning the rules, but my understanding of it because I'm a person who learned English as my second language - as such, my weird writing style; apologies in advance for it.

 

"13. We are a free and open community; members requiring payment for mods, support, or putting anything behind a paywall will be removed without warning. Donation buttons/links to support an author is fine, so long as nothing is promised, given, or rewarded other than a sense of satisfaction for supporting an author or owner of the content."

 

So, my understanding is: if you shared a mod here and completed it -> you're required to post it (or a way to get it) that's free and open, as per this rule. 

Like, you don't want people to get free advertising for their patreon/paywall here. 

 

I've been browsing some older topics in "Adult Gaming" forum. There are some members that post previews for mods when they're working on it. So far so good, as an incomplete mod can't really be "released" (though some members ask for help and post their progress). Later, the same members post previews of the completed mods and then also link to their patreons/paywall. A little later, there are other members asking about when the mod was getting released for the public and they get no response. The modder never replies in that topic. Effectively, the message I'm seeing is "if you don't pay, you're not getting it." This goes against rule 13, right? Like, it's a completed mod that the modder, who is a member, but the mod is paywalled.

 

For the most part, I'm looking at the process/progress of mods being created for a new game. Often, not much is posted to discuss the creation and the members skip to the result. Cheers to the little "1 week later" time markers to point out time passing at a glance.

Overall, I'm not about to point specific fingers to the members. I'm not a real modder - despite my efforts in Yakuza 0 that one time - so I'm like a weirded out spectator. Also, again, I'm not here to question the rules or anything; I'm just trying to get some info straight because I'm a big dumb dumb.

 

On the next thing I kind of noticed: I haven't seen any leaks, personally - because the topics I'm browsing are old enough - but sometimes, there is evidence of someone posting a paywalled mod that was shown off earlier in the topic. This resulted in an argument that happened and then argument was deleted...? It was weird and I am guessing that happened based on some left over messages that weren't deleted that came afterwards... but anyway, the member with the paywalled mod "won" despite going against rule 13.

 

This is effectively where my understanding of rule 13 comes into question a second time because the way I comprehend it, I expected the mod and the modder (who paywalls stuff) should be removed. Also, yes, the member who leaked the paywalled mod gets penalized; that makes sense because what they did was wrong (breaking rules 1, 2 and 7). But that's not what happens. The member who broke rule 13 gets their way and that's that. Like... uh... does rule 1 supersede rule 13? If it does, then what if the leaker is also a modder (I can't confirm that they were, but I'm just wondering about the hypothetical).

 

For the record: the old mods are still paywalled to this day, and the modder shows up in later topics (like, a sequel to the game) and does the same thing. Again, I'm not gonna point fingers; that's not why I'm here. 

 

Am I not understanding rule 13 correctly or something? I feel like I'm missing something. This site is like around a decade old while I'm fairly new here and I don't frequent this site much, so uh... Thank you for your time reading this. Have a nice day!

 

 

Post Note to be clear:

1) This is not a situation where the mod belongs to someone not on this site - as the rule specifically states "members requiring payment for mods" - so that's a different topic. 

2) Mods that are temporarily behind a paywall - like "pay and you can get it early!" seem to be fine here (despite my understanding of rule 13) - but what I saw is a situation where it's simply "Paywalled. Period. You're not getting this without paying."

Let me take a crack at this.

 

Your understanding of Rule 13 is just about right. If a mod/file is posted here and our Members can only get to it by paying then the mod/file is removed. Sometimes this doesn't happen because no one bothers to Report it to the Staff. We can not be everywhere.

 

Many modmakers will place a file on LL and then use that to advertise other mods that they have behind a paywall. While no one likes this, including the Staff here, it is not a violation of the Rules. Again, as long as a mod/file is posted (that someone would want of course) then a blind eye is turned to the "advertising" the mod author places (up to a point). 

 

As a rule, these modmakers are not BANNED from the site. Usually, the judicious use of PMs prevents the need. That being said, those that egregiously and repeatedly violate this Rule are Banned.

 

Now, when Members place a mod/file on LL that is behind a paywall elsewhere that is considered Piracy. Piracy is not tolerated on LL. The mod/files involved will be removed. Now, while this is more strictly interpreted than Rule 13 (because piracy is bad for mod makers and we want to be the best site we can be for mod makers) it also does not usually result in the Member being banned. Sometimes, the offending mod/file is simply removed. For more egregious or repeated violations a Warning may be given. Finally, if it looks like we just can't get through to someone they may end up BANNED. 

 

Having said all this let me add, this is not open to discussion or debate. I have given an explanation in the hope of answering what appears to be a genuine concern. I strongly advise the readers of this Post to not follow up with more, similar grievances. If you find something in violation of the Rules, please Report it - let's not argue about it here.

[Evaloves4]

> Here is another example of what I was talking about earlier. What happened? I finished the sentence and I put a smiley at the end of it after dot. Grammarly warned me about the wrong sign at the end of the sentence and suggested a question mark. I accepted it and it replaced the dot with a question mark but it also erased the smiley. Now, I tried to put the smiley at the end of the sentence again, but it didn't let me, it put it at the beginning of the post. Well, that's not a big deal and I am not making a big problem out of it, but several small problems in the raw turn to a big problem by itself because I never know what would happen with my posts and how they would be displayed in threads.

 

Edited January 4 by Evaloves4

[Guest]

On 12/18/2023 at 10:37 AM, Sir Bron said:

Why complicate this.... into this...

Good news Homer!? Sir Brion and his folowers wants to replace you in working at the whim-fulfillment console.?Well, you might change your mind when a mouse bites your finger or it get swollen from clicking.  
Sorry, but.. I don't find a helpful alternative / invention to the matter in your critique, my friend.?‍♀️

> It's a shame that our good friend DeadJester226 has left the community of Loverslab.?This canny, witty woman with strong personality would know how to wake you up from American dream, you prankish boy.


> Speaking of this multitask fem-blacksmith.. Do you know how to find her lewd legacy?? (various contents: mods, shots, etc.) By the way, it would be useful to LL get an additional function to search a posts of users marked as "guest" using their nick or ID number.
 

Spoiler

> It's good to know that you can still play monkey pranks, man.? Should I ask dear Ashal to develop an automatic apology system for Sir Bron, or can he give fist bump with me??
 I hope you've gotten the list of my offenses out of your head and that we can be in non-hostile relationship.

 All the best in 2024, my friend. Cheers!?
 

Edited January 4 by smartfon

[LongDukDong]

21 hours ago, smartfon said:

> Speaking of this multitask fem-blacksmith.. Do you know how to find her lewd legacy?? (various contents: mods, shots, etc.) By the way, it would be useful to LL get an additional function to search a posts of users marked as "guest" using their nick or ID number.

 

There are posts by some with 'Guest' as an appellation, particularly Guest-Donkey (or is it Donkey-Guest) used for posts made by Donkey, a legacy member and active participant in the creation of Lovers with PK for Oblivion and the animations used therein.  However, I believe those are special cases, and not the result of members who use the current "Delete My Account" option within Account Settings.

It appears that mods uploaded within the Download Manager, and their connected Support Thread, are deleted when a member chooses to delete his/her account.  This is a guess, but would explain why Lewd Legacy no longer appears, even for a Google Search. DeadJester226 must have used Delete My Account, and that is the result. Her blog entries still exist (as Guest), but little to nothing else.  I can accept that, given someone may wish to remove their 'fingerprint' from a particular online community. And it is their work.

@smartfon You may have need to post a request topic in search for Lewd Legacy to see if anyone has a copy they wish to share.

Edited January 5 by LongDukDong

[Guest]

On 1/5/2024 at 6:26 PM, LongDukDong said:

There are posts by some with 'Guest' as an appellation, particularly Guest-Donkey (or is it Donkey-Guest) used for posts made by Donkey, a legacy member and active participant in the creation of Lovers with PK for Oblivion and the animations used therein.  However, I believe those are special cases, and not the result of members who use the current "Delete My Account" option within Account Settings.

It appears that mods uploaded within the Download Manager, and their connected Support Thread, are deleted when a member chooses to delete his/her account.  This is a guess, but would explain why Lewd Legacy no longer appears, even for a Google Search. DeadJester226 must have used Delete My Account, and that is the result. Her blog entries still exist (as Guest), but little to nothing else.  I can accept that, given someone may wish to remove their 'fingerprint' from a particular online community. And it is their work.

@smartfon You may have need to post a request topic in search for Lewd Legacy to see if anyone has a copy they wish to share.

> Hi there.? Many thanks for your willingness to help and recommend the mod of this user, in addition.? Maybe I should cosider an expand my TESIV with these "new traits for PC and NPCs".. 
As long as this add-on for Lovers PK is not already installed. 

Yes, it seems that some of the users' content disappears after deleting their accounts.?

By "lewd legacy", I mean a set of all works of my friend. There are several URLs saved in my browser that lead to DeadJester226's blog entries.. Unfortunately, loading them gives the same picture of the event:
"Sorry! We could not locate the item you are trying to view."?

I understand your point of view, although, my dear friend communicated in one of her posts that she leaves fruits of her works for community LL.?‍♀️It's said that souvenirs / things left of the people which go us, but apparently it doesn't work on Loverslab in this way. 

Damn, I gotta say this!? DeadJester226 is a tough, ambitious, amusing, resourceful woman who is very memorable for me.❤️ We are different in some ways, but this opposite draws / attracts me to her!?
I still hope for the return of this super vampiress to us!?

[Resdayn]

I like to signal that the ignore function is not really working properly 

Spoiler

I clearly got a message from someone who is under the ignore, which not supposed to happen I believe ?

 

Edited January 9 by Resdayn

[Guest]

15 hours ago, Resdayn said:

I like to signal that the ignore function is not really working properly 

  Hide contents

I clearly got a message from someone who is under the ignore, which not supposed to happen I believe ?

 

Have you seen unwanted posts in my profile?? It looks like someone set this stalker on me.. Or maybe it's AI's doing.?
From my observation, this ignore function doesn't block / stop users from replying to someone posts / messages..
It only hides them to some extent / in certain way, when you are online.?
 

Spoiler

> Fine, I can read between the lines / I got it.?
 

Edited January 9 by smartfon

[LongDukDong]

When pertaining to posts... The ignore function, much like in other Forum software, allows you to ignore the replies of another poster and not that they are unable to attempt reply to you or unable to make posts within your thread/topic.  It has never been a form of 'ban this person from my profile/threads' feature, but one where you no longer have to see someone's inane posts... whether they make them or not.

 

16 hours ago, Resdayn said:

I like to signal that the ignore function is not really working properly 

  Hide contents

I clearly got a message from someone who is under the ignore, which not supposed to happen I believe ?

Now if they sent a message to you and you actually saw the message, whether in a post or in PM, that is an issue.

Within some forum software, if you (the ignorer) were to tag someone to be ignored, and the ignored viewed your profile, the ignored individual would not be given the options to 'Send Message/PM/eMail'.  Such options for viewing the ignorer's profile disabled whilst they could still access from other member's profiles.

I don't know if it is true with LL's structure though.

Edited January 9 by LongDukDong

[Resdayn]

30 minutes ago, LongDukDong said:

Now if they sent a message to you and you actually saw the message, whether in a post or in PM, that is an issue.

Within some forum software, if you (the ignorer) were to tag someone to be ignored, and the ignored viewed your profile, the ignored individual would not be given the options to 'Send Message/PM/eMail'.  Such options for viewing the ignorer's profile disabled whilst they could still access from other member's profiles.

I don't know if it is true with LL's structure though.

 

Yeah, that was the issue, I saw it ?

 

30 minutes ago, LongDukDong said:

When pertaining to posts... The ignore function, much like in other Forum software, allows you to ignore the replies of another poster and not that they are unable to attempt reply to you or unable to make posts within your thread/topic.  It has never been a form of 'ban this person from my profile/threads' feature, but one where you no longer have to see someone's inane posts... whether they make them or not.

 

 I thought it works like a block function

[Guest]

57 minutes ago, LongDukDong said:

When pertaining to posts... The ignore function, much like in other Forum software, allows you to ignore the replies of another poster and not that they are unable to attempt reply to you or unable to make posts within your thread/topic.  It has never been a form of 'ban this person from my profile/threads' feature, but one where you no longer have to see someone's inane posts... whether they make them or not.

 

Now if they sent a message to you and you actually saw the message, whether in a post or in PM, that is an issue.

Within some forum software, if you (the ignorer) were to tag someone to be ignored, and the ignored viewed your profile, the ignored individual would not be given the options to 'Send Message/PM/eMail'.  Such options for viewing the ignorer's profile disabled whilst they could still access from other member's profiles.

I don't know if it is true with LL's structure though.

Thank you for sharing your experience on this matter with us and trying to de-escalate the situation. I feel that my friend @Resdayn is all about me, so I am to blame for her reporting discomfort here. She's already received my apology, and now I'm cleaning up the mess that may put her in a bad mood.

[LongDukDong]

5 hours ago, Resdayn said:

Yeah, that was the issue, I saw it ?

If you saw a PM that was sent to you by someone you set to IGNORE, then it is indeed an issue.  I have hope that it can be addressed. I do know that both XMB (eXtreme Message Board) and MyBB (formerly MyBBoard and originally MyBulletinBoard) both disable the IGNORED person's ability to send messages as I so described.

This forum is 'Powered by Invision Community', so looking to see if there are issues wan't a problem. Seeing that they DO have issues...  Only recently is seems that they may have set up something for IGNORE PMs, but appears buggy.  Let's say you had a conversation with someone, and then chose to block them. The Ignored member could not make a new "Message", but could still respond to you via the already existing conversation, said conversation already open. And there are apparently a number of posts asking for the IGNORE feature to be a bit more... robust.   So, it is currently nothing that Ashal or anyone in the Tech Admin department can deal with at this moment.

 

Geez, am I acting as supervisor-pro-tem? 

 

5 hours ago, Resdayn said:

 I thought it works like a block function

 

You are certainly not the first to think so, nor the first within the past several months. 

 

Only the first in the year 2024.

Seriously...?   You're from Markarth?  The BEDS ARE MADE OF STONE!!!!!  I don't care if its good for the back.

[Resdayn]

10 hours ago, LongDukDong said:

If you saw a PM that was sent to you by someone you set to IGNORE, then it is indeed an issue.  I have hope that it can be addressed. I do know that both XMB (eXtreme Message Board) and MyBB (formerly MyBBoard and originally MyBulletinBoard) both disable the IGNORED person's ability to send messages as I so described.

This forum is 'Powered by Invision Community', so looking to see if there are issues wan't a problem. Seeing that they DO have issues...  Only recently is seems that they may have set up something for IGNORE PMs, but appears buggy.  Let's say you had a conversation with someone, and then chose to block them. The Ignored member could not make a new "Message", but could still respond to you via the already existing conversation, said conversation already open. And there are apparently a number of posts asking for the IGNORE feature to be a bit more... robust.   So, it is currently nothing that Ashal or anyone in the Tech Admin department can deal with at this moment.

 

Geez, am I acting as supervisor-pro-tem? 

 

 

I see 

 

Yeah that exactly happened, person got ignored and got around with an existing pm box what made months months ago, so I exited it the moment I saw.

 

Not exactly fan of the flaw, cause I don't like the aspect of someone getting around of it.

 

10 hours ago, LongDukDong said:

 

You are certainly not the first to think so, nor the first within the past several months. 

 

Only the first in the year 2024.

 

🤣 HAh, at least I am first in something

 

10 hours ago, LongDukDong said:

Seriously...?   You're from Markarth?  The BEDS ARE MADE OF STONE!!!!!  I don't care if its good for the back.

 

😝

 

Edited January 10 by Resdayn

[worik]

9 hours ago, Resdayn said:

🤣 HAh, at least I am first in something

 

🤔The first in 2024 to post a Dibella-themed spicy story is still an achievable rank, I guess

Spoiler

 

[Resdayn]

17 minutes ago, worik said:

🤔The first in 2024 to post a Dibella-themed spicy story is still an achievable rank, I guess

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

In progress my dear Worik 😇

[Alessia Wellington]

18 hours ago, LongDukDong said:

You're from Markarth?  The BEDS ARE MADE OF STONE!

 

I take it you've never slept on a marble table? It's super comfy and warm.

[Nonsequitur]

One of the reasons I rarely contribute anymore... you don't have a "Block" function. It only hides the offender from your view and no one else. So, You might ignore someone but that only means you no longer see them, however, they can post whatever they want to your threads... you just don't see what nastiness they post about you... I had this problem. I don't get involved anymore ... seemed to have cured the problem but is counterproductive to the site. 

[worik]

Is there an issue with MFA login procedure?

I tried to log into LL from our game computer and it didn’t accept me multiple times at the MFA prompt (where I entered 100% the correct one). Thankfully, I am still logged in from my notebook.

 

[Resdayn]

On 1/12/2024 at 6:06 PM, Nonsequitur said:

One of the reasons I rarely contribute anymore... you don't have a "Block" function. It only hides the offender from your view and no one else. So, You might ignore someone but that only means you no longer see them, however, they can post whatever they want to your threads... you just don't see what nastiness they post about you... I had this problem. I don't get involved anymore ... seemed to have cured the problem but is counterproductive to the site. 

 

Yeah, I get it, its kinda crappy, at least private messages and profile threads are blocked off.. unless they find an old message, then you have to leave manually 😐

[Z4chary]

On 1/12/2024 at 6:06 PM, Nonsequitur said:

One of the reasons I rarely contribute anymore... you don't have a "Block" function. It only hides the offender from your view and no one else. So, You might ignore someone but that only means you no longer see them, however, they can post whatever they want to your threads... you just don't see what nastiness they post about you... I had this problem. I don't get involved anymore ... seemed to have cured the problem but is counterproductive to the site. 

Somebody removed my comment without notifying? 

 

As I said before, having no option to block annoying people and have them replying to your comments or reacting is not good. A lot of other sites have this issue, that's why people don't contribute as much (like Discord etc...). Its better to just lurk around, which is not good for forum, than risk being attacked by creeps/degenerates.

[LongDukDong]

On 1/12/2024 at 12:06 PM, Nonsequitur said:

One of the reasons I rarely contribute anymore... you don't have a "Block" function. It only hides the offender from your view and no one else. So, You might ignore someone but that only means you no longer see them, however, they can post whatever they want to your threads... you just don't see what nastiness they post about you... I had this problem. I don't get involved anymore ... seemed to have cured the problem but is counterproductive to the site. 

 

Sorry, but as I stated before, that is not the function of the Ignore feature, whether in this or any other web software.

 

 

On 1/9/2024 at 1:23 PM, LongDukDong said:

When pertaining to posts... The ignore function, much like in other Forum software, allows you to ignore the replies of another poster and not that they are unable to attempt reply to you or unable to make posts within your thread/topic.  It has never been a form of 'ban this person from my profile/threads' feature, but one where you no longer have to see someone's inane posts... whether they make them or not.

 

I had noted it being part of the Invisionboard software, the MyBB software, and will add it also is that way with SFM (which this board used previously) and VBulletin software.  Hence, why the forum software brandishes it as Ignore. 

 

Is there software to actively block a member from viewing a thread?  Dependent upon the forum software used, I can safely say as one who actively runs a site myself... yes.  However, with my forum administration experience in VBulletin, MyBb, and variations of Invision, those plugins are designed to be used solely by high-level moderation and adminstration staff, and not accessible by standard members.  As a member, you would not be able to use the feature. Instead, you would need to repeatedly contact staff each time you made a thread to block Mr X

 

Now if someone continues to harass you within LL, that can be called out and the use of the REPORT button would be reasonable if you provide enough content (links to said content.. quotes of statements, etc).  I have indeed used it myself within LL, and had issues resolved. 

Edited January 19 by LongDukDong

[Maxime1543]

Please fix wabbajack not downloading from this site seamlessly. I am a premium nexus user, i shouldn't have to manually download stuff from here just to install a wabbajack modpack.

[HexBolt8]

2 hours ago, LongDukDong said:

Now if someone continues to harass you within LL, that can be called out and the use of the REPORT button would be reasonable if you provide enough content (links to said content.. quotes of statements, etc).  I have indeed used it myself within LL, and had issues resolved. 

This is a key point.  The moderators here will shut down harassment pretty fast, usually without needing to be asked to.  And if it's not harassment (including racial slurs or other such violations), banning someone isn't justifiable.  A true block function risks having mod authors set themselves up as petty dictators, banishing anyone from the kingdom for the slightest disagreement.  For most issues, simply not responding is usually sufficient (don't feed the troll).  If it gets out of hand, there's the Report button.  If the moderator, who's in a good position to be neutral, doesn't think the person was out of line, it might be time to grow a thicker skin and shrug it off.

[Tlam99]

2 hours ago, Maxime1543 said:

Please fix wabbajack not downloading from this site seamlessly. I am a premium nexus user, i shouldn't have to manually download stuff from here just to install a wabbajack modpack.

I must admit, I'm impressed.