[Rant] Indie server owner & tool dev here — my topic was rejected with no reason. What gives?

Server Owners
1

Date: Saturday, 11 October 2025
Context: I run a FiveM server and I’ve built a full anti-cheat + admin console toolset over the last months. I wrote a proper topic to present it (followed the formatting rules, kept it compliant, no off-site sales spam), and it got declined without any stated reason.

I’m honestly deflated. Player counts are already a grind, and when you try to contribute something serious for other owners, you get a silent “no”.

Why I’m frustrated

  • No transparency: If a topic is refused, please tell us why. A one-line reason helps us fix it instead of guessing.
  • Indie devs feel invisible: FiveM thrives on community work. Without small creators/owners, GTA modding wouldn’t be what it is today.
  • Effort vs. reward: I spent real time building a combined anti-cheat/admin console, documenting it, and formatting the post to the letter. Instant refusal, zero feedback.

What I’m asking (constructively)

  1. Clear rejection reasons on marketplace or release topics (even a short template: “Missing X / Needs Y / Violates Z”).
  2. Pinned guidance for tool/anti-cheat posts (allowed phrasing, escrow/Tebex requirements, links policy, screenshots, etc.).
  3. A “review once, fix once” pass: If an OP updates to address feedback, re-review without nuking visibility.
  4. Spotlight smaller creators occasionally. The platform gets stronger when new ideas don’t die in the queue.

To fellow owners/devs

If you’ve had a similar experience (topic silently rejected, unclear requirements), share what finally worked for you. What did you change to get approved? Any do’s/don’ts for anti-cheat/admin-tool threads specifically?

To staff/mods (appreciate your time)

I’m not here to stir drama. I want to comply — just tell me what to change. If anti-cheat/admin console posts have extra rules (e.g., escrow only, proof videos, restricted claims), point me to the doc and I’ll adapt.

I love this ecosystem, but right now it feels like creators are treated as disposable. Please help us help the platform.

— Opium (server owner & tool dev)

1 Like
2

The only special restrictions I know about anti-cheats is that you can’t have a global banlist, shared between different server owners (Resource FAQ - Cfx.re Docs). If your anti-cheats ships a custom FXServer artifact or requires players to install software on their machine, this will likely also be rejected.

I suggest messaging moderation - Cfx.re Community and asking for the reason for the reject.

2 Likes
3

Hi, thanks a lot for your reply!

Quick clarification: our anti-cheat doesn’t use a global/shared banlist, doesn’t ship a custom FXServer artifact, and doesn’t require client installs. The only external calls are configurable Discord webhooks for admin alerts—no other APIs or telemetry.

In brief features:

  • Server-side detections (GodMode, illegal spawns, explosions, rapid switch, basic aim/trigger heuristics, noclip/flight with admin whitelist)
  • Entity protections (clean up illegal attachments on players/vehicles)
  • Anti-tamper/anti-stop with optional grace periods
  • Discord logging with categories/severity and configurable actions

layout

zvs-ac/
  client/
    modules/             -- client-side detectors and probes
  server/
    modules/             -- server-side guards and loggers
    utils/logger.lua     -- Discord webhook logging wrapper
  shared/
    config.lua           -- main configuration file
    utils.lua            -- shared helper utilities
  fxmanifest.lua         -- resource manifest (Lua 5.4)
CODEOWNERS               -- repository owners
LICENSE                  -- proprietary license notice
docs/
  DEPLOY.md              -- deployment and integration guide
  SECURITY.md            -- security policy and rotation practices
  TESTING.md             -- acceptance criteria and validation checklists

If there’s another reason for the rejection. Thanks again!

Best regards,

Opium