Quote from duke_toaster :

At the end of the day, the STCC servers are a pre-qualifying system but if there were to be an STCC div 2, STCC div 3 etc. I doubt 60, let alone 6k+ would turn up every week.

So? Your point being?

Quote from duke_toaster :

For clarification, I have no vendetta against the STCC or any associate of it.

I don't believe you're successfully communicating that.

Quote from duke_toaster :

However, claiming that it has 5000 members is untrue as that is from a public server system which most drivers are doing for fun.

LFS is for fun. Again, what's your point?

[edit] on second thoughts, I'm not remotely interested in knowing. No need to respond.

Quote from duke_toaster :

I have no vendetta against the STCC or any associate of it

really? from where i'm standing it really looks that way!

Quote from Jakg :

i agree, and just had this same conversation with Sam, however i HIGHLY doubt these were Beckies words, more like creative journalism

Quote from SamH :

ajp, as I'm absolutely sure you're fully aware - you must be, you read the article - the CONTENT of the article , i.e. Becky's words, makes it quite clear where those licence numbers come from. It is in NO way misleading.

I haven't yet read the content of the STCC article, I only read the preface/first paragraph of most magazine/newspaper articles as I simply don't have time to read every article, so I hate it when headlines/prefaces are misleading. I've almost got to the point of not reading the Times because it is too tabloidy, AFAIK I don't need an overly intellectual newspaper I just want the facts in the way the BBC uniquely present.

If those words weren't chosen by you then it's just typical ASS editing, a shame because even if someone wants to write a truthful unbiased article most people will only read the preface and decide the article will be full of equal amounts of bullshit

ajp, I think it's only fair to suggest that, before making a comment about an article, you should take the time to read it, and NOT JUST the preface to it. Thanks to your erroneous post, we have a new batch of trolls responding in kind. Way to go. Nice work.

Quote from ajp71 :

If those words weren't chosen by you then it's just typical ASS editing, a shame because even if someone wants to write a truthful unbiased article most people will only read the preface and decide the article will be full of equal amounts of bullshit

I also doubt that it was the STCC's description of events, it probably ASS editorial or some form of journalistic misunderstanding.

Case in point immediately above, ajp

Quote from SamH :

ajp, I think it's only fair to suggest that, before making a comment about an article, you should take the time to read it, and NOT JUST the preface to it. Thanks to your erroneous post, we have a new batch of trolls responding in kind. Way to go. Nice work.

My comment was that the preface was inaccurate. A newspaper would get in trouble for an inaccurate headline even if the article said different so why should this be any different. Please stop taking this as a personal attack against you/the STCC/LFS or even against ASS. It's my feelings after reading the preface to the article.

Bah Cmon people take this to PM, stop dragging this into the Forums, Ajp71 if you have a problem with Auto Sim Sport wording go talk to them and take this to PM.

Quote from ajp71 :

My comment was that the preface was inaccurate. A newspaper would get in trouble for an inaccurate headline even if the article said different so why should this be any different. Please stop taking this as a personal attack against you/the STCC/LFS or even against ASS. It's my feelings after reading the preface to the article.

No, what you said was

Quote from ajp71 :

Having read the LFS articles in ASS I was disappointed to find that they are just as inaccurate as the other articles, trying to claim the STCC league has 5000 racers [...]

So any confusion is entirely by your own hand. If you'd only read the preface, it would have been better to have said that rather than saying you read the articles.

[edit]Viper93, you're right. Responding to crap just invites more crap. It's clearly demonstrated. I'll sit out from here on.

For the benefit of the tape

Quote from Auto Sim Sport, Vol 3 Issue 1, Page 49 :

Bob Simmerman discovers the Sim Touring Car Cup: With 5,000 drivers vying for a berth on the starting grid which boasts 30 of the most elite drivers in LFS- featuring thirty minutes long proffesionally broadcast races along with dozens of startling innovations - is setting a new standard in proffesionalism

(Spelling not included)

EDIT : Yes, I did read the entire article.

Quote from duke_toaster :

For the benefit of the tape


(Spelling not included)

*snore* Enough already. What's Sam got to do about it? Or anyone here for that matter?

Quote from SamH :

As I said, the STCC system has issued over six thousand licences. Not all of them are actively in pursuit of titanium licences, but that's a completely different matter and nobody is making that claim. All of licencees have participated on at least one of the STCC servers, ergo they have been issued STCC licences. Untangle those niknaks.

the (minor) issue i take with that statement is that becky said that the stcc tier has "almost 5000 licensed racers" which to me implies that they are indeed actively racing and aspiring to get titanium (or even just to get into the silver & gold server)

or as ajp put it (must be pretty darn cold in hell now that we agree on something)

Quote from ajp71 :

I read the text in bold in the first page of the article and immediately thought it was saying there were 5000 applicants all trying to get a slot on the STCC grid

but i doubt those lines were written by becky (the bit i quoted ealier was however)

(just realized most of my post is redundant by now but what the heck)

Quote from SamH :

As I said, the STCC system has issued over six thousand licences.

When you say "issued over six thousand licenses" what you mean is "had over six thousand visitors", right? Which is what I said on the previous page, so we're not actually arguing. The only difference is that you call it "issuing licenses" and I call it "running a public server".

Even though I would rather not have this conversation about the STCC going on here, I want to make two points:
1. The article by Magnus is clearly marked as a "comment" (in bold red letters) and therefore is by definition supposed to be very opinionated (biased if you will). Nothing wrong with that.
2. What Becky said was in context of explaing where the idea for the tiered servers came from and how popular they've become. It is imo not misleading, as it's just a factual statement that's true -- whether or not all of those 5000 were actively seeking to become platinum licensed or not does not matter in that context. Others may read something into that, but oh well, opinions differ.

And could we please stop this now?

Edit: forgot to mention that the preface is indeed wrong and thus misleading.

PLease do not drag this thread down into another pointless argument against STCC. Keep it on topic or it will be closed and binned.
If you want to start another thread if you feel the need to have a go at STCC then please do it in the correct place.

@Sam - I never meant to cause offence or start anti-STCC feelings, sorry if I did that, looking back my first post was slightly misleading so I think it's time to leave it.

Quote from Shotglass :

or as ajp put it (must be pretty darn cold in hell now that we agree on something)

lol

Quote from ajp71 :

@Sam - I never meant to cause offence or start anti-STCC feelings, sorry if I did that, looking back my first post was slightly misleading so I think it's time to leave it.

+1

EDIT : Oh wait ... there isn't the RSC applause smiley here.

So is anyone going to make a mag then?

Now that everyone has picked up their toys again.

thought the idea was to use whats already available and also use LFS news portal =)

Quote from ajp71 :

In general I feel your article was informative and importantly unbiased, whilst I agreed with all of it and you did put both sides of the argument across most of the time I feel there were a few unjustified comments about rF being an inferior sim, if you're going to make that kind of comment I think it should really be properly explained, which wouldn't be too hard TBH.

That's why I frased is as I did, not having to go down that road

Quote :

Original text from AutoSimSport Volume 3, Issue 1
...are many that would make the assertion-and take it to their grave-that ISI copied many of the smart solutions from Live For Speed, and implemented them in an inferior simulation.

I remeber the discussion on RSC forums back when ISI released the multiplayer demo of rFactor, and one strong opinion was that ISI ripped of some of the good stuff. I'm not going to take sides in that discussion since I actually think there's room for both sims, and I own and drive them both.

About racecast though... That is based on my own experience

@Funnybear, considering some community members are willing to take a thread OT for more than a whole page, arguing in circles because of just one atricle (maybe just one paragraph!) in one ASS issue about just one facet of the LFS experience, I don't hold much hope for this community being able to produce its own magazine (not that I see much point anyway, considering all the info that can be found on this forum) Just an observation from a lowly, 5th place-getting, copper-licensed STCC server visitor (UFs at FE Green - great fun last night :up. Some people around here have short fuses and itchy trigger fingers.

I mean, come on people...

Is this going anywhere...?

Exactly.

It is debatable how much information about LFS can really be provided to a first time user of this forum, and the intimidating stance of some of the posters here when it comes to "outsiders" could easily turn people away.

I think any question marks over whether or not to run an LFS dedicated magazine or, indeed, for AutoSimSport to provide more coverage is dependant on whether this community wants more members and whether they would be welcomed with arms wide. The only reason to put LFS information "out there" would be attract more players, is this what this community wants?

This whole thread has been like a bunch of pack animals vehemently defending their territories (Not everyone, of course, but enough people in this thread, on both sides of the coin). What we all seem to forget is that we all share the same interests and that is why any of us are here, why any of us have read one single page of AutoSimSport, and naturally why any of us have strong feelings about the sim or style of journalism we support.

The fact is, we all love driving simulated races, online (mostly), and battling wheel to wheel with other humans, regardless of what sim we use to do it.

I have, as we all know, said this a number of times in this thread but let me re-iterate: To create an LFS magazine would be a large amount of work for anyone here, it is a serious commitment in time and effort. AutoSimSport already have the infrastructure in place to create a magazine once a month, if anyone here wanted to write articles about LFS or any aspect of the simracing community then the structure is in place for you to do so, and to express your own journalistic style whilst doing so. So, if anyone here is serious about writing something email me, PM me, or pop over to the AutoSimSport forum and have a chat and things can happen.

If you don't wanna know, or you would rather eat your own eyes than read or have anything to do with AutoSimSport then fair enough, positivity gets results, negativity breeds more negativity.

Thanks,

Jon.

I would have to agree with what Jon said, and whatever happens, this has been an interesting experience. I wouldn't look for any more about LFS related articles or interviews from me--I don't really play it that much, can't stand it offline--and the sounds make online seem a chore at times as opposed to 'fun' but there is no doubt a huge community behind this sim that solidifies its importance.

A community that, honestly, is a bit revolting in some ways. I know you don't all come across that way, but enough of you do that it is obvious you have another agenda and will settle for nothing less than that agenda.

And besides that, I have never seen so much negativity--over so little--in my entire life. Error with the article? Then email the editor so we can correct it for the next issue.

We now have an LFS thread at AutoSimSport forums, you are all welcome to come over there. Or not.

If you do go with your own magazine, give us a call so that we may view perfection.



All the best,

Bob Simmerman