Automatic report generation could be optional. Of course, such system would have to be experimentally verified and its parameters fine-tuned. I will not try to guess how large percentage of time spent reviewing reports (as opposed to racing) would be acceptable to users, and it's all interrelated.
I thought meta-moderation would prevent that. Meta-moderator (trusted admin) could basically change the result of incident assessment and all the people that assessed the same incident differently would have their "fuel points" taken away (possibly leading to "fuel points" deficit if they managed to use them for racing already). In this way a single action by the admin would enforce moderation behaviour of several users. If admins have less time, they may meta-moderate smaller sample of all the incidents but make the penalty (negative "fuel points") for wrong assessment bigger to still keep users on their toes while mass-moderating.
Has anyone thought about building a system for processing reports similar in concept to mass moderation used on Slashdot? Every driver would need to have "fuel points" to be able to race and they would earn them by reviewing racing incidents. Every incident would be assessed by several people selected randomly and the result decided by majority. Assessments different from majority would be considered wrong and not give "fuel points" or even cause penalty. People reviewing incidents would be forced to learn the rules of clean racing from the very beginning. There could be a level of meta-moderation performed by admins (but with little intensity of work required) to resolve controversial cases and to make sure that the assessments are done in accordance with the regulations and not only based on common sense. Possibly a large throughput of report processing could be achieved this way and racers could even be encouraged to report even little incidents by using a simple command usable during a race (which could automatically prepare replay fragment of a certain time lengh before the moment this command was used). Maybe such solution would allow achieving very clean racing environment.
There are many point-to-point tracks in general but only very little part of them may be driven like rally stages with pacenotes. They could at least add pacenotes to all the trailblazer tracks, maybe also to the raid tracks (although there could be problems because of optional routes). With little additional work CM could give rally fans so much more.
IMO the graphics are not that great, especially when compared to Dirt 2 or even Shift (it's not the blur that I like in them though). It is detailed and crisp but just does not seem very impressive to me. OK, maybe that means it is lifelike. The cockpit view is really half-cockpit view or even quarter-cockpit view to be exact.
"Slip fraction" from RAF is not slip angle. It's defined here (and in the RAF spec).
RAF does not contain slip angle directly. I am not sure if slip angle shown by F1PerfView is correct.
You can use my programs from this post to get slip angles (example). However, they are not very easy to use. Not that they are not user friendly, they are but in a geeky way. One factor that is not taken into account in the calculation is the movement (mainly lateral) of front wheel contact patches relative to car body due to steering input changes and caster (scrub radius also but its influence should be much smaller).
Try RAFs downloaded from Hotlap Analyser http://www.lfsworld.net/rafa/ . I think these G's were added in connection with Hotlap Analyser development and are visible in it, so the values must be there. They were not available in older versions of RAF specification. Maybe it's a bug if they are not present in regular RAFs output from LFS (I haven't checked that) and maybe your RAFs are from older LFS version (?). G's are accelarations, so another way of getting them is calculating 2nd derivative of car position and doing coordinate transformation if you want longitudinal/lateral parts.
I think iRacing gives access to relatively clean and careful racing without the necessity of joining leagues, which in fact are even more inconvenient. I don't know if this is a result of the system promoting careful driving (you need reasonably high SR to move to higher license and drive more interesting cars online) or only the fact that many teenagers cannot afford or justify its cost.