There is no doubt that a more varied cargo/steamer fleet would be welcomed by most players, provided the models are made according to specs and do not violate any copyright.

Sorry, but you're a bit incoherent there. :-P Or to use someone's favourite words, you're a "deliberate liar".

Parts used from stock game is always credited GLOBALLY as coming from the stock game (so more precise credits are to be found in the corresponding readmes).

That is NOT omiting credits. Now if a particular modeller or coder desires a bit more personal attention, they are fully free to go to modding sites and ask for such more precise-explicit credits be there for a particular reutilization of their excellent work.

If you don't, means you're a grown up person that undertsands the way crediting is done via referring the user to stock readmes. Otherwise you're a child that doesn't go there to ask more personalized crediting but yet go in tears here about it.

I'm not saying that all the mods out there are flawless, but some of them are very good. Technically, they might not be up to the standard that
TD/1C expects, but they're "good enough." More importantly, they point the way to where a large portion of the IL2 community wants to go. If DT is smart, they'll run to catch up.

Of course. I wouldn't want it any other way.

But I also get very skeptical about arguments that 1C/DT add-ons are flawless, while all mods are dreck. There's a continuum of mods from lousy to great.

Likewise, there are also plenty of places where 1C's work has been shoddy and modders have fixed it. Cases in point: the screwed up dihedral on the Hawk 81/P-40B and the messed up length of the P-51D (which, in turn, screwed up CG and made the plane fly strangely). Fans of the game were complaining about those problems for years and 1C did nothing. After the game was cracked, within a year modders fixed those problems.

In a few places, modders have even fixed DT's mistakes, although DT has been much better about quickly releasing patches to fix bugs.

DT should go out of its way to recruit the more talented modders. Not necessarily add them to the team, but supervise them as "outside contractors." For the less talented guys with good ideas, DT should contact them and say, "can we use your idea" and do the work yourselves.

There should also be formal standards set and tutorials to help modders get up to DT standards. Currently, there's no way to do that.

Yes, you guys occasionally recruit folks like Sita, but it seems like you ignore or alienate lots of other talented modders. There are a lot of sensitive egos in the IL2 modding world, but everyone shares a passion for the game. Obviously, you can't work with the guys who are taking the game in directions which are off-limits (e.g., Korea, high poly cockpits), but that still leaves lots of folks who could be allies if you just approached them correctly.

Being a bit friendlier and using a bit more diplomacy would help everyone (including me). :)

There is a lot of cooperation between DT and modders, much more than you can imagine. It is just not publicized on forums. ;)

Good to hear it. But, what I'm saying is publicize it more!

You guys need a website or something like it, with tutorials, restrictions, a "wishlist" of add-ons, and ideas on how folks can help.

Actually that is the kind of things we, IL2 lovers, want to hear :)

Not arrogant or threatening posts like Mr SQN.

Friendly goes better for everybody always (and same sort of things I've said in modding forums to those few that keep throwing rocks at TD)

Thank you for showing the right way.

If I were to take someone's car, I would make sure to ask owner's permission FIRST. I would not just take it and send a thank you note LATER.
As far as I know "stock" Il2 content (in whole and in parts) is not released with a priori permission to be modified and re-distributed as part of another "application".

There is no such thing, as "good enough". It is either fits technical requirements and "political" restrictions (like NG issue), or not.

From the point of "fitting official requirements" view, one could divide all mods into 3 category:

1. Those that don't even close (90% of all).
2. Those that almost fit.
3. Those, that fit exactly.

In the category Nr1 goes all the franken-stuff. No exceptions.
The category Nr3 mostly consists from mods, that are being developed by people in close cooperation with DT (like IL-4 and SB cockpits, Ki-44 by JapanCat, Ki-45 by Kashiide, etc.). All those authors either contacted DT themselves, or were approached by DT members and agree to work in cooperation with us.
The category Nr2 are mods, made by really talented people without any help from outside. Often those mods have small flaws, that can be relatively easy fixed. In most cases, DT members approach authors of this mods and suggest cooperation. If the author agrees to include his creation in the oficial add-on, we ask him to fix the problems. If the authors agrees, his work automatically goes into cat.Nr3.
But, unfortunately, some authors of this high quality mods either do not want their creations in official add-on, or do not want to make the said modifications to their work. In this case, such mods are left out as well.

Being skeptical is your right. No one would argue with you about it.

When something seems to you, it doesn't mean, it is how it actually is.

And what exactly would be this "correct approach"?

We see it exactly, as we do: a person is being politely asked, if he/she wants his/her creation to be added into official ad-on. Basically, there is only 2 possible replies: yes, or no. If the reply is "no", then well, we go away. Why should we bother this person any longer, after all?

Most of the modders don't even bother with the "thank you note", no matter, what someone tries to imply here. So why we should be gentle or polite with them?

For official add-on - nothing, which looks like actual USN ship, or called like it. Which mean, we can make some generic looking WWII battleship, or destroyer, or whatever and call it "generic US battleship", or "generic US destroyer", etc. But we can not add anything, that looks close enough to the real thing.

As for the smaller generic vessels, well, what Gitano said.