New mod author comment moderation features and updated terms of servic

[bluedanieru]

In response to post #10257006. #10257265, #10258033, #10270191, #10271410, #10282507 are all replies on the same post.

Okay, fair enough. Let's give it a whirl.

I am just curious how you intend to measure if this results in fewer bug reports, constructive feedback, helpful suggestions, etc? I've brought it up several times and none of the cheerleaders for this have addressed that part at all. It doesn't seem like the sort of thing where you can just say "this change has had an impact on constructive posts of 20%" or something like that.

If you do end up reverting this I hope you consider banning from threads instead of files and implementing a blacklist/reputation system as well.

[lifestorock]

In response to post #10257006. #10257265, #10258033, #10270191, #10271410, #10282507, #10296130 are all replies on the same post.

Why don't you put your comments in that direction on hold until the three month testing phase is over? You vocalize your personal opinion and assumption without proof all the time. It's pure subjectivity, nothing more.

Within the three days since arrival of the feature I get the same amount of posts. This includes bug reports and CTD reports. The general tone of the comments is fine.

Edited November 25, 2013 by lifestorock

[greggorypeccary]

In response to post #10295608. #10296027, #10298699, #10298786 are all replies on the same post.

Mod authors now have an option other than take it down because "I don't want to deal with this". We don't get much in return for all of the work that goes into the mods. You can't eat endorsements or spend them, they won't keep you dry or warm.. The only reason anyone comes here is for the mods so if you chase the authors away with negativity or demands, what would be left? I don't quite understand this feeling that the authors have to let anyone that wants use their product. Me, I'm fine with letting anyone use mine unless they prove to me that I don't want them to. If they do that then I really don't want them to. I don't owe anyone anything.

Ps none of this has been a problem for me. Everyone that has come to my page has been very helpful and decent. I have seen it on other pages though and any control given to the creators of the mods is a good thing in my opinion. Edited November 25, 2013 by greggorypeccary

[TheThirdRace]

In response to post #10295608. #10296027, #10298202, #10298786 are all replies on the same post.

I'm a mod author too and I think banning a user from downloading your file solves no problem, it only creates retaliation.

Blocking a user from contacting you in any way (posts or PMs) solves all the problems you can have with a user without creating an hostile atmosphere. You could even ban automatically a user if he's blocked from 5 different authors, which means he is a problem.

If the user is really a problem, he should be banned from the Nexus all together, not just from 1 mod. A mod author should have the right to decide if he want to share his work with the community, but he shouldn't have the right to chose which part of the community.

The banning feature is utter BS. People asking for it just had really bad experiences and want to make the culprit pay. It has nothing to do with removing the problem, it's all about revenge and ego, which is why I'm strongly against the banning feature being available to mod authors. You really think giving the ban hammer to an angry mod author will end up well?

The only way I could get behind the banning option available to authors would be if there was a process for an appeal, but Dark0ne specifically said they weren't gonna accept any request. Giving absolute power with no appeal to someone that isn't a staff member is the best recipe for disaster. It will happen, it's just a matter of time. Then they'll scramble asking themselves how it could happen... Edited November 25, 2013 by TheThirdRace

[luzburg]

Perfectly reasonable feature to add. If a mod user has to abuse this to cover criticism of his mod then that mod is more than likely not worth using in the first place. Its give and take. Mod users and authors need each. If an author is being a dick, all a user has to do is not comment anymore. Yet a modder must trawl through pages of drivel for any gems of feedback. Its great for users too, searching the comments for solutions is a pain when the same question is asked in all the posts on the one page lol.

[greggorypeccary]

In response to post #10295608. #10296027, #10298202, #10298699 are all replies on the same post.

I don't see how giving the people that make the mods the right to decide what happens with them can possibly be wrong.

[greggorypeccary]

In response to post #10257006. #10257265, #10258033, #10270191, #10271410, #10282507, #10296130, #10296307 are all replies on the same post.

I don't see it as a mean spirited turn for the community.
I see it as a response trying to correct a mean spirited trend in the community.

[Drumber]

In response to post #10295608. #10296027, #10298202, #10298699, #10298786 are all replies on the same post.

I agree with greggorypeccary, I think mod authors should have the right to share there work with who they want to share it with. Personally I am happy with everyone using anything I make but if all they do is troll and are generally an ass then I think I should have the right to not share my work with them and report them to a moderator so they can decide if they should be banned or not.

[TheThirdRace]

In response to post #10295608. #10296027, #10298202, #10298699, #10298786, #10299213 are all replies on the same post.

@greggorypeccary

There's no problem letting the mod authors decides if they publish their mod or not. They don't owe anyone anything.

Allowing mod author to specifically target a user is another thing. You have to be careful when you give that kind of power to someone as it can be used correctly or misuse entirely.

Blocking communication between a user and a mod author is like a restraining order. It doesn't impede on the rights of the author or the user while it solves the problem of them bickering about something. Everyone goes their own way, it's the end of it.

Banning a user from a mod is a tool mod authors can use on a whim, no matter how petty or well founded it is. It can be used correctly or misused entirely. The fact there is no appeal with the Nexus staff just exacerbates the problem.

I'm not saying everyone will use this absolute ban hammer on users, I'm saying that because it's available it's inevitable it will happen. That's the problem.

Since blocking communication solves all the problems without any possibility of abuse, it's unacceptable to introduce a feature that gives one side all the powers. You might have faith in humanity, but I don't. Give more power to one side and that side is bound to abuse it. It's a basic psychological reaction from human nature.

Speaking from experience, I made a comment on the mod "Agents of the Righteous Might". In my comment, I said I loved the mod (and it's really good believe me) but there were rookie mistakes such as the whole Mythic Dawn secret base being a freaking labyrinth with no strait corridors, stairs everywhere and multiple stories making the mini-map useless. Basically, I lost myself in the base more time than I could count. Well, for my comment I got almost lynched for complaining having free content. Granted it wasn't from the author himself, but it could have been. And there lies the problem. If the author had been offended by me pointing out mistakes, I would have lost my access to the mod with no appeal whatsoever. So what am I suppose to do in a situation like this? I'll just stop posting comments unless it's "good job, I love it, let me kiss your rear end". Edited November 25, 2013 by TheThirdRace

[greggorypeccary]

In response to post #10295608. #10296027, #10298202, #10298699, #10298786, #10299213, #10299426 are all replies on the same post.

@ TheThirdRace
I see what you are saying.
I believe however that the reason the mods are there in the first place is that the authors want to share them. Banning people who do not deserve it would be counter productive.
Some people are very sensitive about their work and only want compliments and can be insulted very easily. But that still doesn't mean that they have to let people that they don't want to use their product. It's like if you come to my house I don't have to let you in. It might be my shortcoming or yours that causes the conflict but in the end I don't have to let you in. I would always like to have that right even if I am unreasonable in someone else's opinion. But I wouldn't presume to say you can't go into someone else's house.