Interior temperature control

[borski]

Sure, here's a reason.

If I'm finding the temperature uncomfortable, and I don't remember what it's set to, it'd be nice to be able to see without pressing anything and taking my hand off the wheel.

It might just be the car hasn't reached the set temperature yet, or it might be the temperature was changed. Without it being visible, I don't know which it is. Having to actually press something to find out is less good than just having a simple 2 digit temperature number somewhere on the display.

And I agree, if that isn't useful to you, it'd be ideal for it to be customizable just like most other things.

This isn't really a "bold design choice" or anything significant. In fact, if you press the fan on the pilot screen, it will show you this all the time. Or the main screen, where you can see drive modes all the time instead. There's that odd little Lucid cloud connected icon on the dash display home screen that I'd argue is more clutter and less useful than replacing it with 2 little numbers showing the climate set temp.

I don't believe this falls in any of that - it's just they're busy, and it isn't super important. But it'd be a nice configurable to have. I could probably thing of a half dozen or more other things I'd like to just be displayed permanently on the little dash panel top bar where the outside temp is permanently displayed.

Those are valid reasons! That’s all I was asking for.

Thank you for contributing.

 

[hmp10]

Maybe, but the definition of moderator is not something I authored. And moderators, can either be impartial or not. Can't have it both ways. See ample comments where moderators say otherwise on this forum.

I am fine with either, just need to be consistent.

Actually, you can have it both ways. The role of a moderator can vary depending on the thing being moderated. For example, the Cambridge Dictionary gives differing definitions for the role of a moderator depending on the thing being moderated:

 

[duc900]

Actually, you can have it both ways. The role of a moderator can vary depending on the thing being moderated. For example, the Cambridge Dictionary gives differing definitions for the role of a moderator depending on the thing being moderated:

View attachment 24851

Ok, not trying to be difficult here but what you are saying is the moderators are not impartial and are biased based on their views. So any reference to impartiality isn't correct. And when they comment we should expect it to be based on what they believe versus solely on objective facts. Is this what you are saying?

 

[hmp10]

Ok, not trying to be difficult here but what you are saying is the moderators are not impartial and are biased based on their views. So any reference to impartiality isn't correct. And when they comment we should expect it to be based on what they believe versus solely on objective facts. Is this what you are saying?

Here is what I am saying:

Moderators should be impartial in enforcing the rules of conduct on the forum. That does not mean they must be impartial in their views on Lucid and its products or in terms of which points on those topics they choose to challenge from which posters. I sometimes see posts with which I disagree but let pass without comment from me for any number of reasons. And I'm sure that's the case with almost any poster on this forum, moderators included.

But by insisting that one "can't have it both ways", you are in effect demanding that a moderator on this forum must either not participate in discussions as a member with his own opinions or must relinquish the role of moderator.

I have been active on this forum for several years, and you are the only poster I can remember who has asserted that someone cannot participate in discussions as a forum member while also being empowered to enforce rules of conduct on the forum. Every time I have seen a moderator act in the role of rules enforcer on the forum -- and some have had to do so with me on occasion -- he has made it clear he is acting in that capacity. Likewise, every time I have seen a moderator express his views on the Lucid product itself or the company -- views which sometimes disagree with mine -- he has done so without using his authority to shut down me or any other posters who simply disagree with him on those matters.

Everyone else seems neither confused nor incensed by this dichotomy of role. Frankly, the conclusion to which this leads me is that having your opinions countered is a difficult pill for you to swallow and you will resort to strained arguments to cry foul.

 

[victoryroad]

Fascinating discussion and energy. The temperature control is optimal for me. I have not tried to control it with a voice command.

 

[duc900]

Here is what I am saying:

Moderators should be impartial in enforcing the rules of conduct on the forum. That does not mean they must be impartial in their views on Lucid and its products or in terms of which points on those topics they choose to challenge from which posters. I sometimes see posts with which I disagree but let pass without comment from me for any number of reasons. And I'm sure that's the case with almost any poster on this forum, moderators included.

But by insisting that one "can't have it both ways", you are in effect demanding that a moderator on this forum must either not participate in discussions as a member with his own opinions or must relinquish the role of moderator.

I have been active on this forum for several years, and you are the only poster I can remember who has asserted that someone cannot participate in discussions as a forum member while also being empowered to enforce rules of conduct on the forum. Every time I have seen a moderator act in the role of rules enforcer on the forum -- and some have had to do so with me on occasion -- he has made it clear he is acting in that capacity. Likewise, every time I have seen a moderator express his views on the Lucid product itself or the company -- views which sometimes disagree with mine -- he has done so without using his authority to shut down me or any other posters who simply disagree with him on those matters.

Everyone else seems neither confused nor incensed by this dichotomy of role. Frankly, the conclusion to which this leads me is that having your opinions countered is a difficult pill for you to swallow and you will resort to strained arguments to cry foul.

I don't think I am confused by anything. What I am saying is it is okay for people to have views that the moderators don't agree with. And the moderators' views aren't any more valid than any other view.

 

[hmp10]

What I am saying is it is okay for people to have views that the moderators don't agree with. And the moderators' views aren't any more valid than any other view.

No one here has said or suggested it's not okay to have views contrary to those of the moderators, nor has anyone said or suggested that the moderators' views are more valid than other views.

You're just trying to create a controversy where there is none because you apparently can't get past the fact that a moderator happened to disagree with you on something.

You and some other posters here think Lucid should display interior temperatures all the time. @joec and others think it's superfluous. Careers won't be lost, friends and families won't abandon anyone, great causes won't fail over this either way.

 

[duc900]

No one here has said or suggested it's not okay to have views contrary to those of the moderators, nor has anyone said or suggested that the moderators' views are more valid than other views.

You're just trying to create a controversy where there is none because you apparently can't get past the fact that a moderator happened to disagree with you on something.

I don't even have a point of view on this one way or the other. My comment is related to the approach. So you can keep making it about me but that is simply not the case.

 

[Adnillien]

Here is what I am saying:

Moderators should be impartial in enforcing the rules of conduct on the forum. That does not mean they must be impartial in their views on Lucid and its products or in terms of which points on those topics they choose to challenge from which posters. I sometimes see posts with which I disagree but let pass without comment from me for any number of reasons. And I'm sure that's the case with almost any poster on this forum, moderators included.

But by insisting that one "can't have it both ways", you are in effect demanding that a moderator on this forum must either not participate in discussions as a member with his own opinions or must relinquish the role of moderator.

I have been active on this forum for several years, and you are the only poster I can remember who has asserted that someone cannot participate in discussions as a forum member while also being empowered to enforce rules of conduct on the forum. Every time I have seen a moderator act in the role of rules enforcer on the forum -- and some have had to do so with me on occasion -- he has made it clear he is acting in that capacity. Likewise, every time I have seen a moderator express his views on the Lucid product itself or the company -- views which sometimes disagree with mine -- he has done so without using his authority to shut down me or any other posters who simply disagree with him on those matters.

Everyone else seems neither confused nor incensed by this dichotomy of role. Frankly, the conclusion to which this leads me is that having your opinions countered is a difficult pill for you to swallow and you will resort to strained arguments to cry foul.

I completely agree with @hmp10, I was a participant in this forum long before I became a moderator. While the moderators are not perfect, we do try to enforce the rules fairly. We also discuss controversial post among ourselves before taking action. I also have opinions about Lucid and my GT that are shaped both by the GT I own, the forum discussion and my interactions with Lucid. I should be just as free to express my opinion as anyone else on the forum. My opinions are my own but all of the moderators are careful not to dominate a discussions. There are long time members of this forum that are not moderators that I respect and admire a great deal because of their excellent comments over a long period of time. While new members to the forum may weigh moderators views higher than others, long time members know who trust, not based on a moderator title, but based on the reasoned judgement and information provided by the poster. I actually learn more from post that disagree with me than posts that agree with me so long as they are reasoned and based on good information. I will continue to express my opinion on this forum and being a moderator has nothing to do with that.

 

[borski]

I don't think I am confused by anything. What I am saying is it is okay for people to have views that the moderators don't agree with. And the moderators' views aren't any more valid than any other view.

Nobody has ever said the opposite.

 

[A Fischman]

All the defense about not having it is weird. Basically every car does this. It's pretty normal for people to expect it to be there/want it to be there.

Yes, can press up/down to see where it is. But why not just see where it is without pressing up/down? How many cars have you had that don't display it other than Lucid?

There's a lot of information that is generally present or available to be present on most cars that Lucid doesn't show - hopefully, in time, they add these as configurable options.

Yes, like oil pressure.