New mod author comment moderation features and updated terms of servic

[blove]

In response to post #10252415. #10252846, #10253003, #10253436, #10253494, #10253733, #10254612, #10254935, #10255184, #10255502, #10255579 are all replies on the same post.

I should have said no "good" purpose to the community.

While it may serve a purpose to uploaders, it is as a weapon instead of a tool.

Do not be a dick is an argument that never breaks down. Using that weapon is being a dick.

These things should be said now, and honestly, not after the drama.

[eric31415]

In the past, when a mod or author got a lot of trolling, hate, stupidity, whatever in their file threads it frequently led to them hiding or removing their files completely. Lost to the entire community. Look at the Elsweyr mod for Oblivion. One of the best mods ever, removed due to excessive pestering (to the best of my understanding). Being able to block the small but very vocal percentage of complete asshats in a good thing for everyone.

 

I support any changes that give mod authors more control over our files. Why? Because it entices more authors to share their work here, and that is also good for everyone.

 

And that brings me to this point. The Nexus is a place for mod authors to share our work with the public, not a place for the public to share their demands and frustrations with mod authors. The only thing we get out of it is the satisfaction of knowing that others enjoy what we have made. But in the end , the Nexus respects the fact that it is my work, and if I don't want to continue sharing it with a particular person, well, that's my business. I really hope that I never have to exercise the "nuclear option" and ban someone from my files, but I am glad that I can.

[Arthmoor]

In response to post #10255826.

What's the alternative then? Make authors put up with abuse? That leads to your fear that authors will remove their mods from the site entirely. For what other option would there be in the case of someone who has decided they've had enough of certain people?

This is necessary middle ground that's being established. Something that will hopefully put the kind of people who delight in making snide remarks on notice that it won't be tolerated anymore.

It's funny, because a little over a year ago, this debate raged about mod authors with too much power. Not here though. Over on the Steam Workshop. Valve stuck to their guns and authors kept their content controls. Did it descend into the scary world you're painting it as? Nope. It leveled out and has made things more pleasant for BOTH sides. Authors no longer have to put up with jackasses, and users don't have to wade past a mountain of garbage to hope to get their post noticed. It's worked out rather well for everyone. I expect that it will do so here too.

[robsmith]

In response to post #10255885. #10255945 is also a reply to the same post.

Well I do hope that that sort of thing is covered by 'nefarious means' but for this to be highlighted someone will need to get the short end of the stick. And if the author gets banned the community as a whole suffers. The best solution in my mind for all of these arguments is to have a group of 'veteran' authors that are selected by some group that have the ban everything option.

The nexus is a funny thing, its a place for mod authors to put up their work, but its also something resembling a store. In mind, like the actual market, if a author puts their wares up they should be prepared and accepting of legitimate criticism. The moderators would be a analog for a police force, preventing public hatings and slander, not the authors. But my perfect world, my perfect site, not Dark0nes.

[robsmith]

In response to post #10255826. #10256249 is also a reply to the same post.

The only alternative would be to perhaps make it easier for authors to report posts, by doing it through the moderators it would still mean there would have to be a valid reason, not god forbid the authors being a douche.

I'm not that frequent on the workshop, so I cant comment on the state over there. But one thing that this reminds me of is the war inc forums on steam. (or whatever they changed their name to). The developers were given admin rights and proceeded to put down their own 'official' rules and started systematically blocking and barring anybody that did not bend over backwards and proclaim love for their game. This is most certainly not in the best interests for the community, no one can get information on the quality of the product. All I am worried about is the nexus becoming like that, its in the interests of the author (somewhat shortsightedly) to bare anything negative about his mod.

Although I have been burned by a system like this before, so I am biased against a system like this.

[JimboUK]

In response to post #10255885. #10255945, #10256555 are all replies on the same post.

It's nothing like a store, no one has any right to anything here, mods are gifts from people who have worked hard to produce them, they're not wares. We have a right to the game we paid for and anything we create ourselves, access to other peoples creations is a privilege, not a right. Why should anyone share their creations with ungrateful, self entitled or generally unpleasant people?

[N7R]

 

In response to post #10253653. #10254590 is also a reply to the same post.

I get a TON of "constructive criticism" but 95% of it is nothing constructive and all personal opinion on my personal choices I consciously made as a modder.

 

I even put it on the front page first post and even have stickies on it, but people still feel they should say their "constructive criticism".

 

 

then that is the viewer's fault for not reading info on the mod and knowing content in the mod that is locked down or done by choice. I am talking about mods that are open for improvement and people leave constructive criticism and the mod maker takes it in the wrong way banning the user.

 

I know there are plenty of people out there that fail to read info on a mod or don't post nice things. I've read some pretty outrageous remarks by some people on a mod and it's astonishing how selfish they were demanding a mod maker to do more. I'm not a modder of Skyrim but do modding for another game and know exactly what it feels like. You make pages of documentation and people still are too lazy to read it and demand something be added even when it can't be done or you personally chose to have the mod like it is. I'm just saying I would never block someone from my content because they gave constructive feedback, I'm hoping this never occurs for any users who were only meaning to be helpful is all.

 

Only time will tell I suppose.

[robsmith]

In response to post #10255885. #10255945, #10256555, #10256846 are all replies on the same post.

I said its like a store, as in that's the closes thing that its like. More like a open free crafts market. Any way the metaphor is not important, what I was trying to get to was what if a author goes 'rogue' and starts being unreasonable, he's allowed to do that. But that does not really make sense, why would anyone put something on the internet, on a site with the intention of being shared to people, but want to censor things coming in? I am only talking about the ideal commenter, someone whose goal is to improve the mod and show its quality. Whats to stop an author from stopping their legitimate problems. That's all I'm worried about, I like it here and I don't want the site to pick on the good people in the community due to the flaws of the few.

What I meant to get to was, who does this really benefit? The good open community authors will enjoy peoples opinions and criticism, and can report undesirables. The authors that don't care about peoples ideas can say that on the front page and in the sticky and again report the undesirables. The only people it seems to help are authors that want to be nefarious and all controlling. Edited November 23, 2013 by robsmith

[AaronSlash]

In response to post #10252176. #10252894, #10253016, #10253371, #10253416, #10253430, #10253473, #10253502, #10253525, #10253564, #10253731, #10254191, #10254460, #10254546, #10255409, #10255438 are all replies on the same post.

the case you raise is one that would be viewed as abuse by the author and, I'm really questioning if you even read past the point where they said you can block users from the mod itself. if the person gives construction advise on it then that would not be grounds for blocking acess to the mod and if they abuse this then they will be dealt with as it clearly says in the post. Anyone else have any idea what argument they are even trying to make against this that wasn't explained in the original post?

[Dark0ne]

Talk about jumping to conclusions guys. Give it time. Assess the impact and then judge. All these arguments are stupidly premature and only serve to make you look silly. It might be bad or it might turn out fine but we'll only know once the dust settles and we can see the results. Of course we'll be analysing the results continuously and, of course, as has been the way for the past 12 years, if I don't like the direction things are going/have gone I will revert or change things accordingly. I'm never afraid to look at things objectively and admit that a change hasn't worked out for the best (case-in-point: the reputation system for comments). Stop worrying. Give it time. If in 3 months time it's obvious things have changed for the worse then you can start to complain.