Jump to content

Forums

  1. CF Hub

    1. Announcements

      Important information and updates from CF can be found here.

      • 411
      • 15.8k
  2. Member Hub

    1. General

      Information, discussion, and community collaboration can be found here.

      • 443
      • 4.8k
    2. Show Off

      Show off your creations with the community.

      • 173
      • 2.8k
    3. Requests

      Request paid or free work for plugins, extensions, maps, artwork etc..

      • 2.3k
      • 2.2k
  3. Member Resources

    1. For Hire

      Are you a developer or level designer looking for work? Post your services here to connect with customers!

      • 84
      • 4.4k
    2. Creators Directory   (9,661 visits to this link)

      Bring your ideas to life with the right person using our directory of services posted by our talented creators!

  4. Community Hub

    1. Feedback

      Would you like to see something implemented or something changed for the good? Let us know!

      • 406
      • 18.9k
  5. Support Hub

    1. Support

      For questions or support inquires regarding plugins, extensions, maps, artwork etc..

      • 1.1k
      • 1.1k
    2. Site Support

      For questions or support inquires for anything CF related.

      • 550
      • 1.3k
  • Popular Now

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I’d like to respond to your reply. In today's development environment, it's practically unheard of for developers to build everything completely by hand without any assistance from tools — including AI. Utilizing AI does not invalidate the originality or quality of a submission. In fact, leveraging available tools is an industry standard and part of working efficiently and professionally. While I did use AI as a support tool for parts of my code, the overall architecture, logic, integration, and refinement were all done by me. The plugin reflects my intent, decisions, and manual effort — not a copy-paste output. I'm genuinely unsure what criteria you're using to conclude that it was "entirely AI-generated," but if this is based on personal interpretation rather than objective analysis, I believe that's a serious concern. Dismissing a submission simply due to suspected AI involvement, regardless of its actual merit, raises important questions about fairness and modern development practices.
    • What? We get hundreds of submissions a week and have paid curators reviewing daily. While 4 weeks is a bit exaggerated it's not uncommon for it to take a couple of weeks due to the sheer volume. We take on as many curators as we can. Not sure how this is negligence? Based on your responses I had a hunch you may have used AI and I was not surprised to see your entire file is AI-generated. Ironically, it's submissions like yours that cause these long review times. I will keep the file in queue to be properly reviewed but I can tell right away it likely won't be accepted due to it being written by AI.
    • Thank you for reply but This isn't just an excuse — it's a clear failure of responsibility. Regardless of the internal process, taking nearly a month to review a plugin is utterly unacceptable in this day and age. It signals negligence in maintaining the platform and a lack of regard for developer support.
    • gotta remember that there are only a few curators, and lots of file submissions. so it can take a while to go though and weed out the AI slop etc
    • OMG…. It’s hard to believe the plugin review process could take up to a month… it’s honestly quite discouraging. Is there any way to get it reviewed more quickly?
1.8m

Downloads

Total number of downloads.

8.3k

Customers

Total customers served.

125.6k

Files Sold

Total number of files sold.

2.6m

Payments Processed

Total payments processed.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.