Bethesda.net Mods is revising its port rules, we would like your feedback.

[Dmitrias]

RE this section:

"We are also looking to solve a particular issue with closed permissions:

When someone receives permission to port a mod, this is usually done via Nexus PM or Discord, and demonstrated via screenshot. Unfortunately, if these screenshots are called into question there is no easy way to confirm. The moderators’ only option is to have me, or a CM, manually reach out to the author.

We need to simplify this process, and remove all of the uncertainty these screenshots cause."

Does this just apply to bethesda games, or games in general? Because whilst I agree that "just trust me bro" isn't always the most solid of proofs of permissions, I don't think this the way to go about it either.

For a number of reasons:

1) not all authors have their comments sections enabled, and we should be able to respect their want not to (be it because of trolling comments, or otherwise), whilst still being able to inquire about permissions.

2) some mod authors don't use nexus anymore, and can only be contacted for permissions on other websites that they frequent more.

3) comments can be missed, direct messages are easier not to miss. sometimes the notification system doesn't update you about all comments, so you can easily miss some, even if it doesn't miss out any, but you get a lot of comments, you could still miss a comment pretty easy.

4) some mod authors have comments on but just don't frequent them basically kind of the same as above.

5) personally, comments is not really a place i'd think to check for people asking me about permissions, anyways.

6) i have seen multiple cases of people granting permissions to specific people in comment sections and then other people going onto assume that it's blanket permission for everyone and then doing their own thing with the mod. despite the author only giving permission to a specific person.

So, those are my thoughts anyhow. Also, I would wonder how this affects pre-existing mods. Would it be required to ask permissions again so you have public proof?

Edited October 17, 2022 by Dmitrias

[HazakTheMad]

Its a complicated issue that I have no idea what to do about.

There are the matters of mods being uploaded with no permission and there are the matters of this being even more of a hassle.

Perhaps there is not a perfect solution but instead a compromise that can increase protections of mods from being uploaded without permission but with not too high hassle.

 

Maybe require ports to list a way to contact the original author?

[kevkas]

I think a good way to go about is a 'request/approve' form handled through the Nexus for example.

 

Say I was to ask Author1 for permission to port his Mod1 from Skyrim to SkyrimSE (for example), I fill a 'request' form on the Nexus, which has a link to Mod1 and states that I am interested in porting it from one game (origin) to a different game (target). I fill the form, which has that info, as well as details on the permissions (it could just default to 'whatever the mod currently has as permissions' unless stated otherwise), and it could include a message as well to include other details. Once I am done, that form is sent to Author1, who gets a Nexus notification (on the website, or through email as well, kind of like how PMs work at the moment). Author1 then can review the form on the Nexus, and if he agrees he 'approves' that request. If he doesn't agree he can chose to 'ignore' it or 'negate' it. He can also return the request further detailing conditions, such as 'you can port it but you can't do further modifications', or 'you can port it and modify/improve it if you want', stuff like that.

 

Since all of this is handled through Nexus servers, they have proof of the exchange and can log it into their database if they want, depending on how they code the forms.

 

I think that would be far better than a screenshot which can easily be photoshopped by anyone.

[Cartogriffi]

I'd say that requiring newly-uploaded ports to have publicly-available permission would be ideal. I'm perfectly open to stating my permissions upfront (come to think about it, I already do that!) or otherwise stating that a specific port is explicitly allowed. I'd argue that the biggest problem with a change like this would be requiring people to know about it. Imagine passing a law that required all taxis to have a little yellow flag in that spot where we used to put radio antennas - the problem probably wouldn't be one of insubordination but rather one of ignorance. I'm not too familiar with the Bethesda.net ecosystem on the authors' side (though I do intend to change that at some point), but assuming you have control over the upload interface, I propose a banner making the policy change apparent.

 

 

If we change the rules, it won't be retroactive.

 

I also want to update the mod publishing page on Bethesda.net to list the mod rules. So every time you upload a mod, you see them listed before hitting "publish." Eventually folks will tune these out, but we don't change them often so we should be generally safe.

[showler]

 

Ah! I've edited the post to clarify. We are not asking Nexus authors to go elsewhere to provide permission, but to list permissions here on Nexus.

 

Basically, rather than a Nexus author getting PMed here asking for permission, they'd get pinged in the mod comments for their mod.

 

One possible concern regarding having Permissions in the mod comments is that the comments section of a mod page is tied to the forum software, and the forum software is not that great with searching/tracking these days. Unless I've misunderstood what you mean.

[vtastek]

Either way the author gets to verify it. And the author should have the final say. What's the problem?

 

If nexus wants to just automate it for their own sake, it should be two clicks most, a mail link, and an approve button. Probably other, more convenient communication methods will be used for details, no need to complicate the process here. Even two clicks will be seen as too much of a hassle, it will prevent like half the mods from being ported.

[HazakTheMad]

Perhaps listing allowed ports in additional permissions would provide the simplest solution?
At least simplest for Nexus Mods to do.

[StoneSpiralGaming]

Perhaps listing allowed ports in additional permissions would provide the simplest solution?

At least simplest for Nexus Mods to do.

This seems the best option imo, Fallout 4 mods already have it, why not roll it out to other BGS games that support modding on console.

 

That way the Mod Author has full control over whether it can be ported or not at the point of uploading, or if someone asks permissions they can just enable the option

[EnaiSiaion]

 

One proposed solution:

We could require that approvals be made in a public, linkable space, on the mod host itself. For Nexus, this would mean someone approving a port would need to state this in the (original) mod description, mod comments, or forum. (I suspect mod comments are the easiest of these three.)

 

 

What happens if the mod page gets updated and the approval removed? That's one concern I can think of...

[GrafPanzer]

Okay, so to try to answer Cartogriffi's original question:

Currently on NexusMods, admins accept a PM screenshot as proof, and proof is only required if someone questions the permission. If the author disputes the screenshot as a forgery, etc., NM admins can go back and look at the actual archived PMs (I think). I doubt this happens often.

BGS admins can't access archived PMs on any non-BGS site, including NM, so can't verify a disputed screenshot. This is only a problem when an original author disputes a perm screenshot.

Possible solutions:

1. BGS admins refer author-uploader disputes for NM-based mods to NM admins, per an agreement between BGS and NM. Presumably BGS would owe NM consideration for this.

2. BGS admins automatically remove mods when the original author disputes a perm screenshot - unless the perm can be verified because it's on a public or BGS-owned source. This would probably result in most authors' disputes being upheld, reducing porters' incentive to port.

3. BGS implement its own perms system requiring mod authors to specifically grant permissions in a historically verifiable way. This would significantly limit the number of ported mods, but would minimize BGS admins' workload.

As a mod author who has uploaded to both NexusMods and BethNet, I'll also add that BGS should seriously consider upgrading the BethNet (or successor) front end. Serious usability problems with the GUI are one of the main reasons I as an author dread uploading mods myself.