2018 in review and 2019 in the view

[Nimboss]

In response to post #67937096. #67941336, #67941861, #67942656, #67944211, #67955146, #67968296, #68010096 are all replies on the same post.

Madcat221 wrote: I am really hoping that "Mod Pack" is a poorly chosen term for this, because "Mod Pack" means, to me as a modder, "Loose collection of mods accumulated often without concern for permissions, credit, compatibility, or upkeep".

Arthmoor wrote: This ^

I can't tell for sure if it's just bad terminology being used or if you mean actual real mod packs. That needs to be one of the first things that gets clarified.

Zaldiir wrote: This is partially covered in the third paragraph of that section:
"It has caused some controversy in the past due to various reasons, including it taking downloads away from mod authors, the worry it would increase false support issues for mod authors caused by bad mod packs and because others who have attempted to do this have basically created a "mod piracy" platform that completely ignores (and breaks) copyright laws because they did not have permission to distribute the mods contained in the mod packs. Whatever we come up with will ensure none of these are a realistic issue."

Sacremas wrote: Not entirely sure if it's even possible, but instead of an actual collection of mods to download like these usually are, how about a profile of mods to download into Vortex, you activate the profile and Vortex automagically downloads/updates the mods in the profile, with notifications and instructions if anything needs to be done manually, and a pre-set load order included? That way individual author pages still gets the individual download counts, and users not quite ready to start picking things on their own (the main thing I hear from my friends and in youtube comments alike on why they don't use mods) will still get a done install out of it.

jaydawg55 wrote: If what Dark0ne means by "Mod Pack" is offering a single archive for download and installation that includes the primary mod and all its mod dependencies or options in a single plugin, with an installation menu like some FOMODs have, that (1) would be more convenient than multiple downloads/installs and (2) would greatly help users like me stay within the 255 plugin limit. By the time I obtain all the mods that fix game problems for my favorite Bethesda products, I don't have a lot of plugin slots available for quests, new locations, or new characters. Since we can't directly fix game engine design, maybe this is a way to optimize mod design.

This could and should be done in a collaborative way. It seems that as some games "mature" more modders get together to combine their work into larger compilations. Fallout New Vegas seems to have a lot of these partly because the game has been around a long time and partly because it has a lower plugin count (135ish?). Done right, this could work out well for everyone.

Assuming the collaboration/permissions issue gets fixed, then the next question (to me) is who does the work of compiling the package? And related to that question, how would conflicts be resolved? I keep thinking of other questions, so I will stop now.

I admire Dark0ne's ambition. It looks to me like a way he is looking for a way to compete with Creation Club with a free (as in no charge), better quality alternative. I wish Bethesda well, but I also like the idea. Also, you guys have enough standing in this community to influence the direction of this idea.

Tannin42 wrote: Hmm, I don't feel like it's unclear:

> Mod packs are, quite simply, a system whereby a user's mod profile is turned into a "mod pack" in such a way that they, or another user, can download that mod pack and all the mods contained (or referenced) in the pack will be installed in the exact same way, in the exact same order, as the original profile.

and

> It has caused some controversy ... taking downloads away from mod authors, ... increase false support issues for mod authors ... created a "mod piracy" platform ... ignores (and breaks) copyright laws .... !!! Whatever we come up with will ensure none of these are a realistic issue. !!!

So it says, pretty clearly: No, it's not going to take away downloads, not "pirate" mods that haven't been given permission to redistribute, not ignore copyrights.

Don't focus just on the label and what it means to you/how it's been used by others in the past but on how Dark0ne described the system.

RoyBatterian wrote: As long as it's opt-in I don't particularly care.

Arthmoor wrote: The thing is, it's quite unclear because you have people who came away with the impression that it means "Mod Pack" in every familiar definition of the term. Meaning a single package of a ton of mods.

If "Mod List" was the intended outcome, then the article should have made that clear.

One makes the site no better than ModDrop, the other makes it no different from the Steam Workshop. The difference is huge.

I feel like Madcat221 about “Mod Packs”

Mod Packs is not a good choice of naming since it is part of “The Ultimate” Mod Pack™ © group known for hastily slamming together stuff without care for copyright or moral or sense how things work under the hood of modding and release this in one big file as a must have to get focus on how great they are themselves. Seldom or mostly never knowing how stuff works for the game they so boldly pretend they mastered.

A much more cleaner and descriptive terminology would be one of three (could be more) suggestions :

1. Mod Recipe, like in cooking. A workflow and details of ingredients to success to create a great dish.

2. Mod Formula, like in describe proportions in chemical mixtures creating a successful drink, paint, concrete or paint remover fluid.

3. Mod Prescription, like the ones you get after consulting a doctor. Distinct detailed instructions what you should do and how many pills of this and that and when you should take them to success to feel good.

“Mod Packs” is a term mostly connected with bad things and trying to reclaim the term for something else more appropriate I have a hard time to see how it would succeed. Edited February 26, 2019 by Nimboss

[Revan7even]

In response to post #67937096. #67941336, #67941861, #67942656, #67944211, #67955146, #67968296, #68010096, #68052361 are all replies on the same post.

Madcat221 wrote: I am really hoping that "Mod Pack" is a poorly chosen term for this, because "Mod Pack" means, to me as a modder, "Loose collection of mods accumulated often without concern for permissions, credit, compatibility, or upkeep".

Arthmoor wrote: This ^

I can't tell for sure if it's just bad terminology being used or if you mean actual real mod packs. That needs to be one of the first things that gets clarified.

Zaldiir wrote: This is partially covered in the third paragraph of that section:
"It has caused some controversy in the past due to various reasons, including it taking downloads away from mod authors, the worry it would increase false support issues for mod authors caused by bad mod packs and because others who have attempted to do this have basically created a "mod piracy" platform that completely ignores (and breaks) copyright laws because they did not have permission to distribute the mods contained in the mod packs. Whatever we come up with will ensure none of these are a realistic issue."

Sacremas wrote: Not entirely sure if it's even possible, but instead of an actual collection of mods to download like these usually are, how about a profile of mods to download into Vortex, you activate the profile and Vortex automagically downloads/updates the mods in the profile, with notifications and instructions if anything needs to be done manually, and a pre-set load order included? That way individual author pages still gets the individual download counts, and users not quite ready to start picking things on their own (the main thing I hear from my friends and in youtube comments alike on why they don't use mods) will still get a done install out of it.

jaydawg55 wrote: If what Dark0ne means by "Mod Pack" is offering a single archive for download and installation that includes the primary mod and all its mod dependencies or options in a single plugin, with an installation menu like some FOMODs have, that (1) would be more convenient than multiple downloads/installs and (2) would greatly help users like me stay within the 255 plugin limit. By the time I obtain all the mods that fix game problems for my favorite Bethesda products, I don't have a lot of plugin slots available for quests, new locations, or new characters. Since we can't directly fix game engine design, maybe this is a way to optimize mod design.

This could and should be done in a collaborative way. It seems that as some games "mature" more modders get together to combine their work into larger compilations. Fallout New Vegas seems to have a lot of these partly because the game has been around a long time and partly because it has a lower plugin count (135ish?). Done right, this could work out well for everyone.

Assuming the collaboration/permissions issue gets fixed, then the next question (to me) is who does the work of compiling the package? And related to that question, how would conflicts be resolved? I keep thinking of other questions, so I will stop now.

I admire Dark0ne's ambition. It looks to me like a way he is looking for a way to compete with Creation Club with a free (as in no charge), better quality alternative. I wish Bethesda well, but I also like the idea. Also, you guys have enough standing in this community to influence the direction of this idea.

Tannin42 wrote: Hmm, I don't feel like it's unclear:

> Mod packs are, quite simply, a system whereby a user's mod profile is turned into a "mod pack" in such a way that they, or another user, can download that mod pack and all the mods contained (or referenced) in the pack will be installed in the exact same way, in the exact same order, as the original profile.

and

> It has caused some controversy ... taking downloads away from mod authors, ... increase false support issues for mod authors ... created a "mod piracy" platform ... ignores (and breaks) copyright laws .... !!! Whatever we come up with will ensure none of these are a realistic issue. !!!

So it says, pretty clearly: No, it's not going to take away downloads, not "pirate" mods that haven't been given permission to redistribute, not ignore copyrights.

Don't focus just on the label and what it means to you/how it's been used by others in the past but on how Dark0ne described the system.

RoyBatterian wrote: As long as it's opt-in I don't particularly care.

Arthmoor wrote: The thing is, it's quite unclear because you have people who came away with the impression that it means "Mod Pack" in every familiar definition of the term. Meaning a single package of a ton of mods.

If "Mod List" was the intended outcome, then the article should have made that clear.

One makes the site no better than ModDrop, the other makes it no different from the Steam Workshop. The difference is huge.

Nimboss wrote: I feel like Madcat221 about “Mod Packs”

Mod Packs is not a good choice of naming since it is part of “The Ultimate” Mod Pack™ © group known for hastily slamming together stuff without care for copyright or moral or sense how things work under the hood of modding and release this in one big file as a must have to get focus on how great they are themselves. Seldom or mostly never knowing how stuff works for the game they so boldly pretend they mastered.

A much more cleaner and descriptive terminology would be one of three (could be more) suggestions :

1. Mod Recipe, like in cooking. A workflow and details of ingredients to success to create a great dish.

2. Mod Formula, like in describe proportions in chemical mixtures creating a successful drink, paint, concrete or paint remover fluid.

3. Mod Prescription, like the ones you get after consulting a doctor. Distinct detailed instructions what you should do and how many pills of this and that and when you should take them to success to feel good.

“Mod Packs” is a term mostly connected with bad things and trying to reclaim the term for something else more appropriate I have a hard time to see how it would succeed.

I think the best thing to call them that doesn't have negative or misleading connotations would be "Mod Profiles", as it sounds like they intend for them to just be mod profiles.

From

"a system whereby a user's mod profile is turned into a "mod pack" in such a way that they, or another user, can download that mod pack and all the mods contained (or referenced) in the pack will be installed in the exact same way, in the exact same order, as the original profile"

and

"because others who have attempted to do this have basically created a "mod piracy" platform that completely ignores (and breaks) copyright laws because they did not have permission to distribute the mods contained in the mod packs. Whatever we come up with will ensure none of these are a realistic issue"

that they intend for the end result to function like mod packs, but for the process to involve no actual packed archives of mods as has previously been the norm. With Vortex's Profile system the most viable method to accomplish this is it to have a file created and exported by Vortex that when imported tells Vortex to download a list of mods from Nexus Mods , install them, then activate and deploy them according to the included profile in exactly the same way Vortex currently does when we switch between our own mod profiles. If you already had mods installed you'd have to activate them afterwards with the new profile active profile. This way you would have your old mod profiles and the "mod pack" profile and can switch between and modify them as you like.

[DaedalusMachina007]

In response to post #67937096. #67941336, #67941861, #67942656, #67944211, #67955146, #67968296, #68010096, #68052361, #68058036 are all replies on the same post.

Madcat221 wrote: I am really hoping that "Mod Pack" is a poorly chosen term for this, because "Mod Pack" means, to me as a modder, "Loose collection of mods accumulated often without concern for permissions, credit, compatibility, or upkeep".

Arthmoor wrote: This ^

I can't tell for sure if it's just bad terminology being used or if you mean actual real mod packs. That needs to be one of the first things that gets clarified.

Zaldiir wrote: This is partially covered in the third paragraph of that section:
"It has caused some controversy in the past due to various reasons, including it taking downloads away from mod authors, the worry it would increase false support issues for mod authors caused by bad mod packs and because others who have attempted to do this have basically created a "mod piracy" platform that completely ignores (and breaks) copyright laws because they did not have permission to distribute the mods contained in the mod packs. Whatever we come up with will ensure none of these are a realistic issue."

Sacremas wrote: Not entirely sure if it's even possible, but instead of an actual collection of mods to download like these usually are, how about a profile of mods to download into Vortex, you activate the profile and Vortex automagically downloads/updates the mods in the profile, with notifications and instructions if anything needs to be done manually, and a pre-set load order included? That way individual author pages still gets the individual download counts, and users not quite ready to start picking things on their own (the main thing I hear from my friends and in youtube comments alike on why they don't use mods) will still get a done install out of it.

jaydawg55 wrote: If what Dark0ne means by "Mod Pack" is offering a single archive for download and installation that includes the primary mod and all its mod dependencies or options in a single plugin, with an installation menu like some FOMODs have, that (1) would be more convenient than multiple downloads/installs and (2) would greatly help users like me stay within the 255 plugin limit. By the time I obtain all the mods that fix game problems for my favorite Bethesda products, I don't have a lot of plugin slots available for quests, new locations, or new characters. Since we can't directly fix game engine design, maybe this is a way to optimize mod design.

This could and should be done in a collaborative way. It seems that as some games "mature" more modders get together to combine their work into larger compilations. Fallout New Vegas seems to have a lot of these partly because the game has been around a long time and partly because it has a lower plugin count (135ish?). Done right, this could work out well for everyone.

Assuming the collaboration/permissions issue gets fixed, then the next question (to me) is who does the work of compiling the package? And related to that question, how would conflicts be resolved? I keep thinking of other questions, so I will stop now.

I admire Dark0ne's ambition. It looks to me like a way he is looking for a way to compete with Creation Club with a free (as in no charge), better quality alternative. I wish Bethesda well, but I also like the idea. Also, you guys have enough standing in this community to influence the direction of this idea.

Tannin42 wrote: Hmm, I don't feel like it's unclear:

> Mod packs are, quite simply, a system whereby a user's mod profile is turned into a "mod pack" in such a way that they, or another user, can download that mod pack and all the mods contained (or referenced) in the pack will be installed in the exact same way, in the exact same order, as the original profile.

and

> It has caused some controversy ... taking downloads away from mod authors, ... increase false support issues for mod authors ... created a "mod piracy" platform ... ignores (and breaks) copyright laws .... !!! Whatever we come up with will ensure none of these are a realistic issue. !!!

So it says, pretty clearly: No, it's not going to take away downloads, not "pirate" mods that haven't been given permission to redistribute, not ignore copyrights.

Don't focus just on the label and what it means to you/how it's been used by others in the past but on how Dark0ne described the system.

RoyBatterian wrote: As long as it's opt-in I don't particularly care.

Arthmoor wrote: The thing is, it's quite unclear because you have people who came away with the impression that it means "Mod Pack" in every familiar definition of the term. Meaning a single package of a ton of mods.

If "Mod List" was the intended outcome, then the article should have made that clear.

One makes the site no better than ModDrop, the other makes it no different from the Steam Workshop. The difference is huge.

Nimboss wrote: I feel like Madcat221 about “Mod Packs”

Mod Packs is not a good choice of naming since it is part of “The Ultimate” Mod Pack™ © group known for hastily slamming together stuff without care for copyright or moral or sense how things work under the hood of modding and release this in one big file as a must have to get focus on how great they are themselves. Seldom or mostly never knowing how stuff works for the game they so boldly pretend they mastered.

A much more cleaner and descriptive terminology would be one of three (could be more) suggestions :

1. Mod Recipe, like in cooking. A workflow and details of ingredients to success to create a great dish.

2. Mod Formula, like in describe proportions in chemical mixtures creating a successful drink, paint, concrete or paint remover fluid.

3. Mod Prescription, like the ones you get after consulting a doctor. Distinct detailed instructions what you should do and how many pills of this and that and when you should take them to success to feel good.

“Mod Packs” is a term mostly connected with bad things and trying to reclaim the term for something else more appropriate I have a hard time to see how it would succeed.

Timmster wrote: I think the best thing to call them that doesn't have negative or misleading connotations would be "Mod Profiles", as it sounds like they intend for them to just be mod profiles.

From

"a system whereby a user's mod profile is turned into a "mod pack" in such a way that they, or another user, can download that mod pack and all the mods contained (or referenced) in the pack will be installed in the exact same way, in the exact same order, as the original profile"

and

"because others who have attempted to do this have basically created a "mod piracy" platform that completely ignores (and breaks) copyright laws because they did not have permission to distribute the mods contained in the mod packs. Whatever we come up with will ensure none of these are a realistic issue"

that they intend for the end result to function like mod packs, but for the process to involve no actual packed archives of mods as has previously been the norm. With Vortex's Profile system the most viable method to accomplish this is it to have a file created and exported by Vortex that when imported tells Vortex to download a list of mods from Nexus Mods , install them, then activate and deploy them according to the included profile in exactly the same way Vortex currently does when we switch between our own mod profiles. If you already had mods installed you'd have to activate them afterwards with the new profile active profile. This way you would have your old mod profiles and the "mod pack" profile and can switch between and modify them as you like.

Well to toot my own horn: Daedalus Mega ModPak
Created March of 2018.

So Nexus, where's my royalty cheque? ;)

I'm ok with any/all of my 'ModPak' mods being included in other mod packs. I believe that a true modder should be ok with the open spirit of collaboration, communication, SHARING code/data/assets, and realizing that none of us can really exist without stuff to mod. I do find it a bit hypocritical that mod authors actually have the gall to claim 'copyright' on their mods in such a way that prevents free redistribution/sharing.

That said, I get that I'm in the minority in my feelings on this. It has happened with the various 'karters' that make ample money from unauthorized plagiarized reselling of translated games in cartridge form. It seems to continue with those who have an unabashed disgusting habit of open and willfull plagiarism. Did none of these dorks ever hear of 'proper attribution' at all?

Mod authors (IMHO) should be far less concerned with redistribution/modification/alteration of their mods and more concerned with proper attribution/credit for the work they've done. I feel that those on Nexus (and elsewhere) who violate the basic 'give credit you dork' rule should be blacklisted by the modding community itself.

I still feel the DP (Donation Points) system that Nexus hyped up for so long has been nothing more than a way for scammers/VPNers/etc to use bot networks to passively download files and artificially boost DP to purchase Steam keys to resell on the grey market (and thus enable money laundering and all the filth that accompanies it). Few systems are foolproof but I feel that Patreon links (for those who want to include them) would've been a better idea than DP. I am happy for the charitable contribution aspect of DP but I feel it is a band-aid more than an actual solution.

[Dark0ne]

In response to post #67937096. #67941336, #67941861, #67942656, #67944211, #67955146, #67968296, #68010096, #68052361, #68058036, #68058226 are all replies on the same post.

Madcat221 wrote: I am really hoping that "Mod Pack" is a poorly chosen term for this, because "Mod Pack" means, to me as a modder, "Loose collection of mods accumulated often without concern for permissions, credit, compatibility, or upkeep".

Arthmoor wrote: This ^

I can't tell for sure if it's just bad terminology being used or if you mean actual real mod packs. That needs to be one of the first things that gets clarified.

Zaldiir wrote: This is partially covered in the third paragraph of that section:
"It has caused some controversy in the past due to various reasons, including it taking downloads away from mod authors, the worry it would increase false support issues for mod authors caused by bad mod packs and because others who have attempted to do this have basically created a "mod piracy" platform that completely ignores (and breaks) copyright laws because they did not have permission to distribute the mods contained in the mod packs. Whatever we come up with will ensure none of these are a realistic issue."

Sacremas wrote: Not entirely sure if it's even possible, but instead of an actual collection of mods to download like these usually are, how about a profile of mods to download into Vortex, you activate the profile and Vortex automagically downloads/updates the mods in the profile, with notifications and instructions if anything needs to be done manually, and a pre-set load order included? That way individual author pages still gets the individual download counts, and users not quite ready to start picking things on their own (the main thing I hear from my friends and in youtube comments alike on why they don't use mods) will still get a done install out of it.

jaydawg55 wrote: If what Dark0ne means by "Mod Pack" is offering a single archive for download and installation that includes the primary mod and all its mod dependencies or options in a single plugin, with an installation menu like some FOMODs have, that (1) would be more convenient than multiple downloads/installs and (2) would greatly help users like me stay within the 255 plugin limit. By the time I obtain all the mods that fix game problems for my favorite Bethesda products, I don't have a lot of plugin slots available for quests, new locations, or new characters. Since we can't directly fix game engine design, maybe this is a way to optimize mod design.

This could and should be done in a collaborative way. It seems that as some games "mature" more modders get together to combine their work into larger compilations. Fallout New Vegas seems to have a lot of these partly because the game has been around a long time and partly because it has a lower plugin count (135ish?). Done right, this could work out well for everyone.

Assuming the collaboration/permissions issue gets fixed, then the next question (to me) is who does the work of compiling the package? And related to that question, how would conflicts be resolved? I keep thinking of other questions, so I will stop now.

I admire Dark0ne's ambition. It looks to me like a way he is looking for a way to compete with Creation Club with a free (as in no charge), better quality alternative. I wish Bethesda well, but I also like the idea. Also, you guys have enough standing in this community to influence the direction of this idea.

Tannin42 wrote: Hmm, I don't feel like it's unclear:

> Mod packs are, quite simply, a system whereby a user's mod profile is turned into a "mod pack" in such a way that they, or another user, can download that mod pack and all the mods contained (or referenced) in the pack will be installed in the exact same way, in the exact same order, as the original profile.

and

> It has caused some controversy ... taking downloads away from mod authors, ... increase false support issues for mod authors ... created a "mod piracy" platform ... ignores (and breaks) copyright laws .... !!! Whatever we come up with will ensure none of these are a realistic issue. !!!

So it says, pretty clearly: No, it's not going to take away downloads, not "pirate" mods that haven't been given permission to redistribute, not ignore copyrights.

Don't focus just on the label and what it means to you/how it's been used by others in the past but on how Dark0ne described the system.

RoyBatterian wrote: As long as it's opt-in I don't particularly care.

Arthmoor wrote: The thing is, it's quite unclear because you have people who came away with the impression that it means "Mod Pack" in every familiar definition of the term. Meaning a single package of a ton of mods.

If "Mod List" was the intended outcome, then the article should have made that clear.

One makes the site no better than ModDrop, the other makes it no different from the Steam Workshop. The difference is huge.

Nimboss wrote: I feel like Madcat221 about “Mod Packs”

Mod Packs is not a good choice of naming since it is part of “The Ultimate” Mod Pack™ © group known for hastily slamming together stuff without care for copyright or moral or sense how things work under the hood of modding and release this in one big file as a must have to get focus on how great they are themselves. Seldom or mostly never knowing how stuff works for the game they so boldly pretend they mastered.

A much more cleaner and descriptive terminology would be one of three (could be more) suggestions :

1. Mod Recipe, like in cooking. A workflow and details of ingredients to success to create a great dish.

2. Mod Formula, like in describe proportions in chemical mixtures creating a successful drink, paint, concrete or paint remover fluid.

3. Mod Prescription, like the ones you get after consulting a doctor. Distinct detailed instructions what you should do and how many pills of this and that and when you should take them to success to feel good.

“Mod Packs” is a term mostly connected with bad things and trying to reclaim the term for something else more appropriate I have a hard time to see how it would succeed.

Timmster wrote: I think the best thing to call them that doesn't have negative or misleading connotations would be "Mod Profiles", as it sounds like they intend for them to just be mod profiles.

From

"a system whereby a user's mod profile is turned into a "mod pack" in such a way that they, or another user, can download that mod pack and all the mods contained (or referenced) in the pack will be installed in the exact same way, in the exact same order, as the original profile"

and

"because others who have attempted to do this have basically created a "mod piracy" platform that completely ignores (and breaks) copyright laws because they did not have permission to distribute the mods contained in the mod packs. Whatever we come up with will ensure none of these are a realistic issue"

that they intend for the end result to function like mod packs, but for the process to involve no actual packed archives of mods as has previously been the norm. With Vortex's Profile system the most viable method to accomplish this is it to have a file created and exported by Vortex that when imported tells Vortex to download a list of mods from Nexus Mods , install them, then activate and deploy them according to the included profile in exactly the same way Vortex currently does when we switch between our own mod profiles. If you already had mods installed you'd have to activate them afterwards with the new profile active profile. This way you would have your old mod profiles and the "mod pack" profile and can switch between and modify them as you like.

DaedalusMachina007 wrote: Well to toot my own horn: Daedalus Mega ModPak
Created March of 2018.

So Nexus, where's my royalty cheque? ;)

I'm ok with any/all of my 'ModPak' mods being included in other mod packs. I believe that a true modder should be ok with the open spirit of collaboration, communication, SHARING code/data/assets, and realizing that none of us can really exist without stuff to mod. I do find it a bit hypocritical that mod authors actually have the gall to claim 'copyright' on their mods in such a way that prevents free redistribution/sharing.

That said, I get that I'm in the minority in my feelings on this. It has happened with the various 'karters' that make ample money from unauthorized plagiarized reselling of translated games in cartridge form. It seems to continue with those who have an unabashed disgusting habit of open and willfull plagiarism. Did none of these dorks ever hear of 'proper attribution' at all?

Mod authors (IMHO) should be far less concerned with redistribution/modification/alteration of their mods and more concerned with proper attribution/credit for the work they've done. I feel that those on Nexus (and elsewhere) who violate the basic 'give credit you dork' rule should be blacklisted by the modding community itself.

I still feel the DP (Donation Points) system that Nexus hyped up for so long has been nothing more than a way for scammers/VPNers/etc to use bot networks to passively download files and artificially boost DP to purchase Steam keys to resell on the grey market (and thus enable money laundering and all the filth that accompanies it). Few systems are foolproof but I feel that Patreon links (for those who want to include them) would've been a better idea than DP. I am happy for the charitable contribution aspect of DP but I feel it is a band-aid more than an actual solution.

I still feel the DP (Donation Points) system that Nexus hyped up for so long has been nothing more than a way for scammers/VPNers/etc to use bot networks to passively download files and artificially boost DP to purchase Steam keys to resell on the grey market (and thus enable money laundering and all the filth that accompanies it).

There are plenty of people who have commented on this very post who can vouch for the system.

In order to scam the system someone would need to make around 10,000 accounts on the site, switch between every single one of them when downloading and ensuring they're all on different IP addresses. For their efforts, they'd get about $10. At that point, (1) we'd notice it, as it would be seriously alarming behaviour picked up by us. It wouldn't even pass through the manual check we do when paying out each month and (2) the amount of time and effort required would yield utterly negligible results.

And Patreon links are already allowed. They have been for a couple of years now. Edited February 27, 2019 by Dark0ne

[WightMage]

Glad to see you're still kicking, Dark0ne. :3

[JossyFoxxy]

Hello? I need a solution... I can't download a 700mb mod at 90 kb/s ...

Edited February 27, 2019 by JossyFoxxy

[Achloryn]

I joined this site back in 2011, before Skyrim was even released, and it only had a small handful of games on here. (I think I was looking for Dragon Age Origins mods at the time).

 

Thinking back to how the site was back then, and how ungodly huge it has become is mindblowing, and I am incredibly stoked to see what the future of this site will bring. Seriously, there is a LOT of really kickass news in this post. I'm glad to see at least one gaming community that hasn't turned into a shiteating toxic wasteland that's turned in on itself. This community is really a bright spot across all gaming platforms imo. Congrats to you guys, you deserve it.

[FreedomsFlame]

I appreciate getting the yearly review and roadmap, especially now when Nexus is going through some pretty drastic changes (Vortex and mod packs are kind of a big deal). Keep up the good work, y'all.

[KALOWG]

I love these yearly reviews. Keep them coming!

[IKobi]

Regarding 2FA, you'll find the current system is easily exploit and bypassed by blackhats, we should have the option to use an authenticator (rather than e-mail, due to the application passwords those have).