New mod author comment moderation features and updated terms of servic

[katling]

In response to post #10255826. #10256249, #10256750, #10271213 are all replies on the same post.

I'm not sure using the Steam Workshop as an example is really valid in this case. Although both the workshop and the Nexus host mods, you're kind of comparing apples and oranges a little bit there. The Workshop is an addendum to Steam's core business. They ultimately don't care whether mod downloaders (and modders for that matter) are happy or not because they know that they're not going to lose those downloaders and modders from their core business where they make their money - selling games.

The Nexus is a different kettle of fish. You rely on ad views and paid members to make your money so you can run the site. Therefore while the modders are indeed important because they make the mods that draw people here, the users are equally as important because without them, the site wouldn't even function. Both modders and users are equally valuable to the site. Without modders, you have no users. Without the users, you have no modders because they will go where the users are. Neither side should be open to copping abuse or bullying and neither side should be permitted to bully or abuse others.

Now I would say the potential for abuse of the banning system is low but it's definitely possible. Now normally I'd say that wouldn't be a problem but the fact that there is no review system from the site admins is frankly a little on the skeevy side. With that decision, you're essentially saying 'we think the modders are ALWAYS right and the users are ALWAYS wrong and there are never ANY situations where that isn't the case.'

Now while I'd say the bulk of the cases would indeed be the modder is right, just as there are jerk users, there are inevitably jerk modders and with this system, you're also encouraging the borderline jerk modders to run right over that border because there is going to be nothing to stop them because you have told them you will always consider them to be in the right without ever looking at the evidence.

tl;dr - there's nothing essentially wrong with the new rule about banning but the lack of a review system is what makes it decidedly on the skeevy side.

[Deleted7103646User]

very good feature, i'm impressed.

[bluedanieru]

So, I originally put this in another thread for discussion, but it's the wrong one so moving it here.

 

So, if there is a problem with my mod and it's something I need to know about, is there a greater or lesser chance that I'm going to hear about it in the comments section of my mod page now?

 

I suspect less. Obviously, it's less. Letting us delete dumb comments is enough. Letting us ban individual users from posting in comment threads is even something I could get behind (not unilaterally though and the user should have the opportunity to appeal to site admins). This modding community has enough drama already and this just adds fuel to the fire - it's terminally stupid. The comment section for most mods is already filled with mostly 'thanks for this mod' posts, etc., which is bordering on spam already.

 

I've gotten good suggestions in the comments sections of my mods, constructively critical in tone. Stuff that has improved them. I welcome those kinds of comments. I don't expect I'll be getting a great many of them anymore.

 

This 'feature' makes Nexus a worse mod hosting site, and it lowers the quality of mods overall.

 

 

 

 

So, if there is a problem with my mod and it's something I need to know about, is there a greater or lesser chance that I'm going to hear about it in the comments section of my mod page now?

 

I suspect less. Obviously, it's less.

 

I'm a bit confused. How do you figure? People will still post constructive criticism, this isn't going to stop them from doing so. A few heavy handed modders may push some people away, but I do feel that most of our modders that are worth anything will have enough restraint to not abuse the feature(s).

 

I don't really want to derail this often-funny thread with things that should be discussed elsewhere though, so...

 

Sorry, I thought this was the place to comment about it. If there is another thread link to it and I'll take it there.

 

Even if I don't use this feature (and I never will), I will still be negatively affected by it. It's not as though users are going to think "oh, well this author won't arbitrarily ban me for petty reasons, but this one will, so I'll only post in the comments for his mod, but not the other". They'll just realize they can be banned from accessing certain files for any reason once they post in a comment thread, with no apparent recourse, and they're not going to distinguish between who will or won't do that - they'll just stop commenting altogether, anywhere. I have a real problem with that.

 

The worst part is the negative effects are hard to quantify. It's just less informative, more content-free posts. A lot of posts are like that already :smile: You won't be able to attribute the loss in quality back to this decision directly, so it won't seem like there is really a problem. But there is.

 

I also assume that if I make it clear on each of my mod pages that I will never ban users from downloading my files, no matter what they post in the comments, that will be frowned upon?

 

I just don't see what this accomplishes that wouldn't be equally served by allowing us to ban users from posting in the threads in the first place. In fact that's even better since it appears even if we ban them from the file they can still post in the thread. So what's the point?

 

[bluedanieru]

What's the alternative then?

 

Banning users from ever posting in the comment section for a particular mod again, or in the comment section of any of your mods, seems 100x better than this.

 

To be clear, I don't really care what happens to the trolls either. I am concerned that ordinary users will be less likely to post constructive, critical feedback, as a result. The potential negatives are just too great now.

 

If you post constructive criticism now, the best case is the author will implement your suggestion and that's that. The worst case? They ban you from downloading any of their files ever again. So why bother? It's too much risk. And probably some users will try to be clever and create an alt account - getting both their accounts banned from Nexus completely.

 

But just getting banned from commenting on one mod, or one author's mods? Not really a big deal, since if the mod author does that he clearly wasn't going to listen to you anyway - for better or for worse.

Edited November 24, 2013 by bluedanieru

[Vamyan]

@bluedanieru -- I actually tend to agree with you in principle, but I think you're severely overestimating the impact of the current implementation also. Maybe in 3 months or so when the whole thing is revisited, it can be changed if needed. I personally doubt there will be much need. Time will tell.

 

I disagree about explicitly stating that you would NOT ban users from your mod(s) being frowned on. Nobody cares what you put in your description/readme. I also am rather jaded, and believe that the users who needed to read it most, wouldn't read it anyway. This is Murphy's Law as applied to Mod Descriptions.

 

Let it be known to the masses reading this thread, that I am entirely neutral. I don't care one way or the other. I could get rid of problem users previously, by going through the (sometimes overworked) moderator team, and I can do the same thing now. The only difference is, the moderators are only going to be seriously involved when someone disputes it and/or appeals something. Even then, a mod creator should have the final say whether a (perceived) abusive user has any access to their files. If a mod creator were so inclined, they could (and have in the past) eliminate the mod from the nexus entirely, just because one or two users were being abusive in some way.

 

All this has been hashed out I'm sure, by the staff. I'm done with this thread. I'm done with this topic. I'm pretty sure most (if not all) of the Nexus staff would agree. The feature is there, and it's not going anywhere for a while. Live with it, or move on to another site, I care not which.

 

If this came off as being too harsh, I apologize. It's been a rough day, and I'm tired of seeing people :wallbash: on this feature.

 

To make this a bit less grumpy-sounding, a word from our sponsor.

 

http://pics.lolme.org/2013/08/happy-grumpy-cat-14.jpg

[Arthmoor]

In response to post #10274779.

You do realize that one of the options made available will do exactly what you want - block a user from posting further comments in your threads.

I hate to sound like a broken record, but this sort of system works everywhere I've seen it implemented and in the long term helps reduce trolling because despite their desire to be asshats, trolls still want your stuff. If they realize you can keep them from getting it, they tend to hold their tongues.

[bluedanieru]

 

In response to post #10274779.

You do realize that one of the options made available will do exactly what you want - block a user from posting further comments in your threads.

 

I hate to sound like a broken record, but this sort of system works everywhere I've seen it implemented and in the long term helps reduce trolling because despite their desire to be asshats, trolls still want your stuff. If they realize you can keep them from getting it, they tend to hold their tongues.

 

 

There is? As in, that and nothing more? I don't see that anywhere. You can block users from your file, which apparently will also block them from posting in your comments, but that's different. And, you can delete comments, but only after they've posted them.

 

I don't see any option anywhere to ban users from a thread.

 

And as I pointed out, with something like this it's hard to judge side effects. Yes, it will cut down on trolling which is great, but if it also cuts down on constructive posts, are you going to notice?

Edited November 24, 2013 by bluedanieru

[Telyn]

This is a very difficult issue to weigh. It's important to remember that the modders here are incredibly generous. Most of them will probably never get a single donation after what is sometimes months of work. So I do understand their frustration when a user is annoying or abusive. On the other hand I think we all know there are some creators who despite their creativity are not particularly mature, especially when someone points out there is an error in their mod. There have even been a few creators who have had to be banned for misbehavior of various kinds, and a few of them had made rather famous mods. Good mods. So no matter what this site does, there are going to be some abuses, some problems. It's inevitable when we are talking about a huge community. People are complicated.

 

I respect the decision which has been made here, and I do hope it will reduce modder burnout. I have seen mod descriptions wherein authors state they aren't going to update a mod until abusive comments are removed, for example. Now, some of those comments might not break any rules, mind you, and some individuals may be oversensitive, but it's still not good to see that happen. Everyone loses.

 

As a user, though, I am still concerned that this new feature can potentially be used to prevent sincere and polite users from reporting serious bugs in the place other people considering downloading that mod are most likely to see these reports before they download. Most authors love to be told about bugs, and are very good about responding in the comments so everyone can see the response and what the author intends to do about it, what workarounds may exist, etc. But there was one fellow years ago who was convinced absolutely nothing was ever ever wrong with his mod and was very insulting to anyone who ever suggested something might need fixing. He's long gone, but some of you who have been modding a long time might remember one creator who even called highly respected fellow modders pretty much noobs and idiots. Fortunately I never downloaded anything by him but if he had been able to just silence the many people he was attacking, even more people would probably have trusted that person. It's a concern for me because the games we mod are very fragile before we even start modding them. That's why we need those fantastic unofficial patches.

 

Having to do a clean reinstall, repatch, etc., etc is never fun, but it would be even less fun if it later emerged that the creator had been informed of a serious game breaking issue many times and simply hid it. Those of us who love to customize our games know that reinstalling comes with the territory sometimes, no matter how how well we research before modding them. Most authors know that once in awhile they will release a mod version that does have a bug or two, and they can handle that. That too just comes with the territory. But what holds this and similar communities together is deep mutual trust. Responsible creators must rely on users to inform them of problems and conflicts that did not show up during their testing so they can verify and fix. If people are afraid to report, it would harm them greatly. Users must rely on creators to be honest and frank about known issues because without that, we could lose the reputation we have here for being one of the very safest places to get mods. I hope we never lose that trust, whatever happens.

[DrakeTheDragon]

In response to post #10275200.

I copy that, and I'm also done with this thread. The topic was discussed to death inside the authors' section for like 3 or 4 years, as far as I can remember back, and now the feature was introduced and it's here to stay, at least for a while.

The people here are rather quickly on the barricades against proposed 'solutions' they disagree with, instead of standing up against the 'problems' which made them neccessary in the eyes of so many authors that they were introduced now to begin with. Perhaps it's easier that way round.

I myself have no personal interest in the blocking feature and don't see any need to defend it here. Why I even started explaining, reasoning and mediating again is beyond me. I don't even care.

If those 'community' people here feel a need to fight with the many authors who were desperately longing for it, then so be it. I'm not one of them, nor am I to fight their battles.

In an 'ideal' world things like this won't be neccessary, the community would treat each other maturely and respectful and everybody would be happy, and nobody would ask for this. But we're living in a far-from-ideal world, and the people here prefer to not help making it one. Yet they demand from everybody to act as if it was one.

I'm done with this talking to a brick wall, a useless waste of time.
Fare thee well @thread, and happy fighting!

[acidzebra]

I haven't been on the nexus all that long. I have a meager crop of skyrim mods, which I offer under the most liberal terms possible (more or less it's "do whatever with it"), except where I use assets of others, then I respect their wishes. I have even made provisions as to what should happen if I disappeared entirely, because I hate mods ending up in mod rights limbo (and the mere fact that there is such a thing here should settle where ownership of content lies as far as the nexus is concerned). If asshats visit my thread, I generally laugh at them or poke at them and I doubt I'll ever have need to ban people from my mods.

 

But at the same time, this community (which I do enjoy very much) that the people who oppose this new feature like to go on about already has a problem: a small vocal minority of utter asshats who think that somehow they are ENTITLED to spout their personal opinion/dislike (nowadays nearly always under the guise of "constructive criticism" to evade the banhammer). Who think that somehow they are ENTITLED to demand changes in mods to suit their tastes. Who think they are ENTITLED to technical support for their 200+ mod broken savegame playthrough, because it happened to finally break completely by adding one last mod (and the response is always: hurr durr your mod broke my game). Who think "it doesn't work halp" is some kind of useful comment, and who feel ENTITLED to the time and attention of the author because they are too lazy to read a paragraph of instructions. Who think they can somehow coerce a modder to do what they want them to do by "denying them endorsements until they change X". Do people think endorsements put money in our pockets or bread on our tables?

 

It's a small vocal minority who offer nothing of value to the community except as statistics, but at the same time, they are causing good people who actually create useful content to stop doing that, or to think twice about it. And the community is continually growing (including this minority). That's a real and actual problem, not some kind of potential future specter of crazy modder abuse. And if modders seem "moody and crazy" sometimes, you should consider that one brick through your window can ruin a day of people saying hello in the streets.

 

I get the point about fearing downloaders giving less useful feedback because of "fear of crazy moody modders and their personal banhammer". That's a fear, not an actuality. This is a trial, not a set in stone feature. I figure the downloaders who actually do give useful constructive feedback in a respectful fashion will continue to do so because they know what they are saying is reasonable, and they and the mod-makers they talk to are part of the same community after all. The asshats will now have to think twice, or risk losing access to the content that they want. "want", not "are entitled to". And if somehow all mod authors magically turn into little Stalins ruling their mod pages with an iron hand, well, ultimately it's their mod. Their content, shared freely. Or not. Now with more fine-grained access controls.

Edited November 24, 2013 by acidzebra