Snark

No idea, myself. However, in general, if you've got a question about a specific mod, the best place to ask is generally in that mod's release thread, since that's where all the mod's users (and the author!) hang out, so all the experts are in one spot. Here's the thread for Scatterer, perhaps ask your question over there?

When a user breaks the rules in a minor or inadvertent way for the first time, usually we'll just drop them a friendly PM letting them know what the issue is and asking them to be careful in the future. (Not everyone realizes the full scope of the rules, especially if they're new, so we try to cut folks some slack if something seems like an innocent mistake.) However, if the violation is more serious, or if they repeat problematic behavior after already having been asked by the moderators to stop, then we issue a forum warning. Warnings have points attached. The number of points to assign for a particular warning is up to the moderator's discretion, but we try to follow a more-or-less consistent pattern in order to be fair and (reasonably) predictable. We try hard to avoid arbitrariness. How we typically assign points Some notes below on how we typically assign points. Important: These are typical practices only, not a hard-and-fast rule. We can and do deviate from the practice described below, as and when (in our judgment) circumstances warrant. YMMV. This is just an "FYI, we usually do something like this" in case you're interested. A warning will typically receive a greater number of points according to these factors: how egregious the violation is (worse offenses get more points) any mitigating factors (for example, we tend to treat unprovoked attacks more harshly than egregiously provoked ones) repeated offenses escalate (each successive time you get warned for the same thing, the points go up) Quite often we'll give a warning with zero points on it-- these don't have any actual impact on the user's ability to use the forum, but can serve as a sort of "shot across the bow" to get the user's attention if we think a simple PM won't do the trick. Zero-pointers are typically only for cases where it's the first warning and it isn't an especially bad violation. We also tend to apply an informal "cooldown" to escalation, for most offenses. If you get warned a second time for posting politics after we just warned you last week, then yeah, that's gonna escalate. But if your prior warning for that was a couple years ago, and you've been clean the whole time? That's pretty good, so we're more likely to "reset the clock" and treat it as a first offense. Again, this is on a case-by-case basis; we try to be reasonably consistent, but adjust as needed for context. (Since we have to use our judgment a lot, there's always the risk of arbitrariness there. So we usually mitigate that risk by consulting with each other before assigning points. In other words, if you ever do get points, please consider it a judgment from the team rather than an individual foible of the particular moderator who issued you the warning. We can all see each others' actions, and we routinely touch base.) Typical consequences of points Points accumulate. If you reach a certain total number of points, there are consequences that affect your ability to use the forum; in general, the higher the number of points, the more severe the consequences. Typical penalties and thresholds are as follows: 5 points: "Queuing" for a few weeks. When you're queued, it means any posts you make (or edits you make to existing posts) are hidden from public view until a moderator reviews and approves your post. (The same way it is for new users who haven't yet made five posts.) 10 points: Temporary ban for a while, followed by a longer period of being queued. 25 points: Permanent ban from the forum. (This rarely happens and only occurs with really seriously offensive users. A person has to work pretty hard at it to make it this far.) I'm deliberately vague about the durations above, because I don't want to set expectations. We can and do tinker with the consequences and durations, sometimes. Duration of points In most cases, points do not stay on your account permanently. They typically are kept on your ledger for several weeks, and then they expire. So, for example, if you get a 2-pointer followed a week later by a 3-pointer, that's five points altogether and you'll likely be getting queued. But if the 3-pointer happens a couple of months after the 2-pointer, then the initial two points will likely have expired by then, so you'll be only at 3 points total rather than 5, and therefore likely not queued. (Again, we can and do adjust the longevity of points when we assign them, if circumstances seem to indicate. But the usual length is "a few weeks.") TL;DR We try to give people a lot of rope. As long as you're not an egregious jerk and are reasonably conscientious about stopping a behavior if a moderator asks you to, then it's unlikely you'll ever experience any actual consequences that actually affect your ability to use the forum. Also, if you do get a warning with points and you think it's unfair or unwarranted in some form, or if you don't understand why you got warned, please do contact us privately (via PM) and we're happy to discuss. We're only human, after all, and there might be mitigating circumstances that we're not aware of, or whatever. And we're always happy to explain. We won't get mad at you for questioning us, it helps keep us honest.

Well, heck. I typed out a whole nice long explanation with examples and everything, and then stupidly forgot to ctrl-C the whole thing before pushing the "submit" button, so when the darn forum gave me one of those 502s, I lost the whole thing. And now I don't have the heart to go and re-type it all over again. The TL;DR is that the "ToggleAction" syntax only works with ModuleAnimateGeneric. Which, fortunately, is what I believe you need to be using here. I haven't tested it myself, but I believe your config ought to work if you change the moduleSource from "ModuleCargoBay" (which is definitely wrong, that module has no actions on it) to "ModuleAnimateGeneric" instead. Try giving that a whirl and see what happens?

Going back to the title of the thread: The answer is simple: They do it the exact same way that spacecraft with reaction wheels do. You just use your built-in biological reaction wheels. They're called "arms and legs". If you're floating motionless in space, for example, and you windmill your arms in one direction, your body will rotate in the opposite direction because your net angular momentum has to remain at zero. You're leveraging the principle of conservation of angular momentum. You also have the ability to increase or decrease the moment of inertia of your arms and legs based on how far out from your CoM you hold them, and you can leverage that, too, For example: Stick your arms out in front of you, straight, and sweep them to the left: your body rotates to the right. (By a smaller amount, because your body's a lot more massive than your arms.) Then you pull your arms in close to your body and sweep them back over to the right again. It'll make your body rotate left, yes... but your arms have a lower moment of inertia when you're sweeping them right, so your body won't rotate as much to the left as it rotated right during step 1, above. Voila, your limbs are back to their starting position, and you're still not rotating, but your body has rotated slightly to the right from when you began. (First it rotated right, then it rotated left by a smaller amount). Repeat the above steps to rotate around as much as you like. We can't spin our joints like wheels, no. But it works. To illustrate, I've colored your statement above: green for the correct statements, and red for the incorrect. Swinging the arm back to its start position does exert a force back in the the opposite direction, and does bring you back towards the start. But you can jigger it so it doesn't bring you back as much to the start as you originally moved, and so you end up with a net change in orientation when you complete the operation. You can do this by "putting your thumb on the scales", which you do by changing your limb's moment of inertia. Which you can do by bringing it closer or farther to your CoM. You arrange things so that your limb has a big moment of inertia when you move it one way, and a smaller moment of inertia when you move it the opposite. Your net angular momentum remains zero throughout the process-- when your arms are moving one way, the rest of you is moving the opposite. So you can't use this technique to change your net angular momentum. For example, if you were sitting at rest to begin with, you can't end up spinning round and round. Imparting net angular momentum like that would require expending reaction mass, such as RCS. It's the exact same limitation that reaction wheels on spacecraft have, and is why spacecraft need to have RCS even if they also have reaction wheels. All of this is the reason why cats always land on their feet when dropped. It's why gymnasts and acrobats and people diving off a high diving board can control precisely what orientation they land in, after doing multiple flips and such in midair. (Yes, they carefully control the spin when they launch... but they also actively control while in flight). You do a lot of it when you walk-- it helps you maintain balance. It's just that your balance is good enough (since your brain's designed for it) that you don't notice the little automatic corrections your body makes to keep you from toppling over. Ever watch someone learning to ride a unicycle? In the early days, before they become really proficient and their balancing is still pretty tenuous, you'll notice them twisting their body and windmilling their arms around a lot in order to maintain balance. That's what they're doing there, too-- using their arms as reaction wheels to help with balancing. (Being a unicyclist myself, I can attest that it works.) That's actually irrelevant to this discussion. Be very careful not to confuse energy with momentum (either angular or linear). They're completely different things. Nothing in this discussion has anything to do with where energy comes from-- this whole discussion is about momentum (specifically, angular momentum)-- so don't get distracted by red herrings such as energy. Quoted for brevity and truthiness. This, exactly this. What he said. (Other people on the "yes, you can" side of this argument are correct, too. I'm just quoting this one because it's nice and short, a quality that I notoriously lack.)

Moving to KSP1 Mods Discussions.

The above content has been split off from the main CKAN thread, here, because it's more about discussing opinions on CKAN's merits and so forth rather than discussing issues with CKAN itself. As such, it's not really on-topic for that thread, as it's unhelpful to people who are just trying to use CKAN. Please feel free to continue discussing the matter here. However, I would caution folks to please remain civil and refrain from accusations, ad hominem attacks, and the like. Thank you for your understanding.

Some content that took the thread off-topic (general discussion of opinions about the merits of CKAN rather than discussion about CKAN itself) has been moved to a thread of its own here:

No idea, perhaps just go and ask the people who are using them? Folks are generally pretty friendly about this sort of thing.

And once they aggro on you, they'll keep chasing you to the ends of the earth. Not like the other baddies, who will give up on you and return to their patrol spot if you run away far enough. Yeah, those critters are nerve wracking.

What Bob said. They may not be immediately recognizable in the list, if your eyeballs are looking for the fancy unfolded appearance, because their default thumbnail in the tech tree is the fairly dull cylindrical appearance they have when they're retracted. Also: This assumes you have the default stock tech tree. If you're running some mod that significantly rejiggers the tech tree in some way, then depending on how that mod is written (including the nitty-gritty details of specifically what it does with ModuleManager patches), then the antennas from this mod may or may not get brought along for the ride. I've never tested that (since I myself generally don't run tech-tree-altering mods), so I don't actually know whether it would be an issue or not. Just something to be aware of, in case you observe any oddness in that regard.

Nope. This mod just looks at action groups that exist in the game. My understanding of how the other mod works is that it provides the necessary UI and functionality to behave as if there were additional "action groups" in the game... but because of the way the original developers implemented action groups, I believe it's not actually possible to truly add action groups to the game. Since all my mod "knows about" is what it can see in the available action groups that the game provides, there's no way for it to "see" the extra stuff that any other mod adds that looks-and-feels like an action group but doesn't actually change the base game behavior. The only way to do that would be if I added a bunch of special-case code into my mod, to try to detect that this one specific other mod is out there and then try to interoperate with it, and that's not something I've done (or am realistically likely to do, at this point). (Sorry for the delay in replying!)

Some content has been removed. Folks, a gentle reminder to play nice, please, and to remember that you're not a moderator, so please don't try to police others' posts. If you have a concern, just report it, and the moderators will decide whether anything needs addressing. It's what we're for.

Further content has been redacted and/or removed, due to personal remarks and off-topic "arguing about arguing". Folks, please don't make things personal. In an open community like this, you will encounter people who disagree with you, and arguments will result. This is fine, and is to be expected. But please keep a few things in mind: It's about the post, not the poster. Please contain your remarks to the objective topic under discussion, and don't let your irritation with the person sucker you into making personal remarks. It never ends well. In that vein: Please address the person's points. How they choose to make those points, and their style of writing or argument, is not your concern. If you think that someone is so egregiously rude that they're breaking forum rules, then please file a report and the moderators will have a look. It's what we're for. Beyond that, though, it's not your place to tell anyone else how to be, so please don't. Try to stay germane to the topic, please, which is this mod. Arguing about how someone else argues, or defending your own behavior, is off-topic. Please bear in mind that if you're rat-holing on some esoteric technical point, 99%+ of the people here will have no interest in it because they're unaffected. Doesn't mean you can't discuss it, but a lengthy esoteric technical argument doesn't help people. Quite the opposite. Please don't drown people in matters that don't concern them. The debate about ModuleManager and prefabs, in particular, appears (AFAICT) to have run its course, here. I'm seeing tons of vociferous, heated yes-it-is no-it-isn't technical arguments about prefab minutiae, none of which (AFAICT) has anything to do with actually helping a ModuleManager user solve a practical problem. The argument is all about who's right and who's wrong, which nobody cares about other than the people arguing. So, with that in mind: Please drop the prefab argument, folks. It's not helping. If you have a concrete recommendation for ModuleManager users-- such as "if you have problem X, you should do Y to resolve it", then by all means post that, because that will actually help people. But anything else is technobabble that users don't actually need at this point, so if you want to discuss that, take it elsewhere, please. Thank you for your understanding.

Further off-topic posts removed. Folks, please don't make things personal, which includes gossiping about anyone. If you have a concern about anyone's behavior that you believe is rule-breaking, kindly report it to the moderators and we'll have a look. It's what we're for. Otherwise, other people's business is none of yours. Also, please don't try to tell anyone else what to do or not to do. This is called "backseat moderating" and is not allowed. Thank you for your understanding.

Some content has been removed. Folks, a gentle reminder, please leave real-life politics out of the forum, even tongue-in-cheek or in jest. Thank you for your understanding.