The Sunday Discussion - CDante

[SgtZodiac]

 

First, I enjoyed the interview = )
Second, I agree that folks should have their preference respected when they create something. I personally reach out to mod authors before creating videos about their mods because I don't want to waste my time creating something that isn't wanted. The only time that I do create a tutorial for something when I can't get a hold of the mod author is if I get enough comments asking me to do so, if a mod author hasn't responded at all (didn't say yes or no) and its a part of something that I base an entire guide around (personal policy). Though, here's my two cents...

I take the same tact as GamerPoets and ask permission. It's just common courtesy to do so. I've had only one mod smith tell me no and I respected his wishes. Everyone else has been awesome including you Dante. I can sympathize with your material being used without permission because it happened to me. Silly part was had the person who used my stuff just asked I would have given permission as long as they gave me credit. In the end I did as the song says and "Let it Go".

How would you feel about YT mod reviewers that don't make money off their vids? I don't monetize and probably never will. Edited March 6, 2017 by SgtZodiac

[Loveblanket]

In response to post #48146255. #48146575, #48146820, #48147580, #48149420, #48155115 are all replies on the same post.

Loveblanket wrote: Couldn't disagree more about the mod review restriction. If you put it out there, people have the right to review it. There is absolutely no restriction against it. No permission is needed and even if a mod author said they don't want their mod reviewed there is nothing they can do about it legally so it wouldn't matter anyway. The idea that someone's work would be free from criticism is laughable and is never going to happen. Nobody in their right mind would want it to happen. What if drug companies could put out products and say that they can't be reviewed or regulated? Or, how about nobody checking out the food products on your store shelves? That isn't a world anyone wants except charlatans that put out shoddy products. Heck, there are people that would specifically review mods that said they didn't want to be reviewed and I wouldn't blame them.

snorlax420 wrote: I think the point is less "I don't want my mod to be criticized" and more "I don't want people to make money by showing off something that took me so many hours to release for free". It's a fair point. I think you're right in that there isn't anything a modder can do to stop it currently. Though maybe that could change in the future, somehow? I'm no lawyer so I can't say for sure!

Crimsomrider wrote: That's not what he meant. It's not about that people don't want their mods reviewed, it's about people not wanting to earn money for mod reviews.

What he meant was that Youtubers are practically making money by showcasing mods. The one who made the mod in the long run does not get anything, but the Youtuber does. Why should people earn money for reviewing your mod ?

Look at MXR for example who now has 3 million subscribers and made a living by showcasing other people's mods which are FREE. Look at Juicehead, best example. I was following his mod reviews in the beginning until I noticed he is uploading pointless speculation videos each time he has no mods to review. No matter how misinformed his videos are, he keeps uploading them just for views and money.

He doesn't even review mods properly, he barely takes the time to do so and his thumbnails are taken from the *screenachers" directly. So basically he earns money by taking other people's content and "reviewing it".

I had plenty of my mods reviewed by him and he butchered 90% of them. I can understand that you can make one tiny mistake, but when you manage to butcher my story that comes with the mod, it is obvious you haven't been paying attention. You just took my mod, threw some bullshit story that you didn't pay attention to and "reviewed it". That's not reviewing a mod, that's false information and bad advertising. He made money off of my mod and badly advertised it.

My story was about a tragedy of a General's wife and he managed to butcher that story and turn into something like "the Minutemen found her and turned her into this machine". Does that sound like a proper review to you ?


So yeah... I agree with CDante. If people don't want youtubers to make money off their mods, they have a right to claim their video. Just like gaming companies can claim a video when you use their footage/content. Just look at Nintendo which claims a lot of videos, they do not allow reviews that much. I noticed a screenarcher who claimed a video for using their screenshot as thumbnail without proper credit.


EDIT : My bad, I admit I made a mistake and was quite rude for mentioning Juice. I just wanted to make a point to the first post on why some people might not want Youtubers to earn money for reviewing mods. I shouldn't have mentioned any names, unfortunately I was not thinking straight and therefore I wrote something without thinking about whom it may affect.

I sent an apology to you in a PM Juice, hopefully you read it and if you decide I'm the biggest asshole on the planet, I won't judge. I agree, what I did was stupid and rude, but I also admit when I'm stupid and rude. So hopefully I haven't offended too much and I hope my apology has helped in some way.

I won't edit the original comment because I won't hide the mistake of what I said, but I just wanted to prove a point on the topic at hand. I make mistakes sometimes... what can I say... I'm only human.

cdante wrote: sorry, don't really want to go into an argument about this subject, just want to make something clear before it totally gets misunderstood.

"...the idea was to add a feature that allows you to flag your mod pages whether you like your mods being reviewed or not.(...) with a feature like this, they could notify YouTubers that they don’t want their mods being used in this fashion. And as a result, YouTubers could do their mod searches with a filter and only review mods made by authors who are happy with this concept."

maybe I wasn't clear enough but what I meant by that would be an actual tool for mod authors. like a checkbox. like many other checkboxes mod authors have when they edit the attributes of their mods. if you checked it, it would mean you don't like reviews. (or you like them. doesn't matter which way). but it would create a new filter for the site's search engine. just like an NSFW tag or a non-adult-only filter.
youtubers who respect this decision would use this filter and wouldn't bother with mods whose creators don't want reviews.

sorry if I wasn't clear. gonna play the English is my second language card. ;)

juicehead3311 wrote: Well I'm sorry you feel I misrepresented your mods. I particularly enjoyed the content you were putting out and I do read through the lore behind many of your mods. Now at the same time I work with a time restriction. Condensing a multi-paragraph story into a few sentences is sometimes hard for me personally and I truly am sorry if the result was me misrepresenting what you wanted it to say. At the same I do remember that video and I did encourage everyone to read it over for themselves.

As for speculation videos I personally love opening up the dialogue. I like doing the research on different things and posting my speculations on it online. Those videos typically have more of a conversation going on in the comments and I enjoy the engagement they provide. Describing them as "just for views and money" is a gross simplification and not why I make YouTube videos.

I am deeply sorry that my content made you think less of me. I just feel sending me an email, a PM on here, or even reaching out to me on my discord like many others have is a much more appropriate way to fix those issues. Regardless, I will no longer make videos on your mods. I don't want you to feel that I am unjustly profiting off of your hard work and in the future I am more than happy to stop covering the content of any mod author. You guys create a ton of free and really cool content that I personally enjoy covering and experiencing. I do not just look at modding as easy money and views (I have a "pay the bills" job).

GamerPoets wrote: First, I enjoyed the interview = )
Second, I agree that folks should have their preference respected when they create something. I personally reach out to mod authors before creating videos about their mods because I don't want to waste my time creating something that isn't wanted. The only time that I do create a tutorial for something when I can't get a hold of the mod author is if I get enough comments asking me to do so, if a mod author hasn't responded at all (didn't say yes or no) and its a part of something that I base an entire guide around (personal policy). Though, here's my two cents...

This would cause a split in the community, if it was used. Many mod users will be annoyed (being on one side of the fence or the other) with either youtubers or mod authors. Many youtubers who agree to not create videos for those mods won't be able to show any mod lists that they create or have guides on that incorporate those mods so the youtuber would omit that mod all together and teach their viewers to not (indirectly) use those mods to follow their guides (and probably some would say directly not to use them). Then a question would arise...would there be a way to differentiate between whether or not tutorials and showcases are the same thing? If that same mod author wants a tutorial (due to many people complaining that they can't install it) how does he or she justify that one person can create something about their mod but another can't? (its preference, cool, I get it, but many won't "get it" and will be put off by it.) What if a youtuber has a lets play or a lets roleplay series and uses one of these mods in it? It would technically be showcasing the mod when it pops up in the LP. If that's allowed or if a youtuber just uses it in an LP regardless, viewers may ask (if they like the mod) for the youtuber to showcase it. Then the youtuber (the ones who reply to comments) would say they can't showcase it and state why. Then that viewer would form a sort of "annoyance" towards that mod author.... and the list of things that I could expand upon along these lines is too long for me to care to do so = )

So back to my initial statements. Let mod authors do what they want. I respect it either way but be mindful of what could and will (in some form or another) happen even if mod authors were simply encouraged to write on their descriptions (don't showcase my mod) but to not have it directly enforced some how (an honor system). There will still be a growing disconnect between those authors who flag their content and the people that bring their creations publicly to thousands and millions of people (even for innocent reasons) and it would open a door to split mod users, mod creators, and video viewers down the middle on various issues/questions.

Perhaps a better solution would be to find a way to flag video creators who misrepresent a modders creations and force them to produce a better product or to not create a video if they can't respect the mod. No one will be upset (at least not many) and most will respect (again, only a small few wouldn't) the mod authors for not wanting his or her creations misrepresented and the youtubers who obey their wishes. However, you just can't go "too far" with it because then you would get into the area of "you are modifying game content that wasn't yours to begin with (I get people bashing modders frequently in my comments and I ban them from my channel as I'm friends with a large number of mod authors) and you don't want others to modify what you have modified or to share it in videos or you want to put restrictions on what some do for a living... (news reporters report news whether you want them too or not, whether it's accurate or not, about any subject on earth or beyond, that they want to report and whether it properly represents the subject at hand or not and they make a living from it.. even if it ruins peoples lives). So again, even if you find the best possible way to implement something like that there will always be an opening for a large split in the community, for those who actually care about it. People love to hate people on the internet. Just give them a reason too. Even if you can't enforce a video restriction (which you can't) but "politely" flag your file as "do not create a video of said mod"(via an honor system) it will still create this type of controversy. And the only content (video) creators who would respect a modders wishes are ones who care about the community and the authors creations in the first place. So you would reduce good media production on your mod and only have videos out there by youtubers who could care less about an authors wishes in the first place.

If the solution was "you can use my mod in a video you just can't monetize it" then you are going to get people (myself included) who would simply opt out of the mod all together ( i create tutorials that take from 50 to 200 hours to create and barely make enough money to keep my channel alive no matter personal income). A youtuber who creates playlists of tutorials or "Must Have Mods" videos that doesn't show a good mod because it can't be monetized?... well re-read everything that I already wrote. In my position, it's not hard to see the many potential outcomes even when done innocently and with good intentions.

@Cdante. I understand where you are coming from now. I just wanted to point out that people that review anything should not be intimidated. They have the right to review and the review itself is allowed to make money, just like every movie reviewer and consumer reports system anywhere on earth and those that create have nothing to say about it and hopefully that won't change. It wasn't a direct attack on you or anything like that, I just feel that with recent events like the takedowns on youtubers and the very real lawsuits that even if you win cost real money, are an attempt to stifle free speech. It wasn't meant in any way at all as an insult to this article, I respect the s#*! out of you, I just don't want those that try to look out for consumers of any content to do so while having to worry about being in court for three years and how to pay their lawyers fees. If there was a misunderstanding, the fault was mine and I ask for your forgiveness. I just wish we could speak our minds without needing a lawyer on speed dial and of course that has nothing to do with you personally. Cheers. Edited March 7, 2017 by Loveblanket

[morbidslinky]

In response to post #48146255. #48146575, #48146820, #48147580, #48149420, #48155115, #48187727 are all replies on the same post.

Loveblanket wrote: Couldn't disagree more about the mod review restriction. If you put it out there, people have the right to review it. There is absolutely no restriction against it. No permission is needed and even if a mod author said they don't want their mod reviewed there is nothing they can do about it legally so it wouldn't matter anyway. The idea that someone's work would be free from criticism is laughable and is never going to happen. Nobody in their right mind would want it to happen. What if drug companies could put out products and say that they can't be reviewed or regulated? Or, how about nobody checking out the food products on your store shelves? That isn't a world anyone wants except charlatans that put out shoddy products. Heck, there are people that would specifically review mods that said they didn't want to be reviewed and I wouldn't blame them.

snorlax420 wrote: I think the point is less "I don't want my mod to be criticized" and more "I don't want people to make money by showing off something that took me so many hours to release for free". It's a fair point. I think you're right in that there isn't anything a modder can do to stop it currently. Though maybe that could change in the future, somehow? I'm no lawyer so I can't say for sure!

Crimsomrider wrote: That's not what he meant. It's not about that people don't want their mods reviewed, it's about people not wanting to earn money for mod reviews.

What he meant was that Youtubers are practically making money by showcasing mods. The one who made the mod in the long run does not get anything, but the Youtuber does. Why should people earn money for reviewing your mod ?

Look at MXR for example who now has 3 million subscribers and made a living by showcasing other people's mods which are FREE. Look at Juicehead, best example. I was following his mod reviews in the beginning until I noticed he is uploading pointless speculation videos each time he has no mods to review. No matter how misinformed his videos are, he keeps uploading them just for views and money.

He doesn't even review mods properly, he barely takes the time to do so and his thumbnails are taken from the *screenachers" directly. So basically he earns money by taking other people's content and "reviewing it".

I had plenty of my mods reviewed by him and he butchered 90% of them. I can understand that you can make one tiny mistake, but when you manage to butcher my story that comes with the mod, it is obvious you haven't been paying attention. You just took my mod, threw some bullshit story that you didn't pay attention to and "reviewed it". That's not reviewing a mod, that's false information and bad advertising. He made money off of my mod and badly advertised it.

My story was about a tragedy of a General's wife and he managed to butcher that story and turn into something like "the Minutemen found her and turned her into this machine". Does that sound like a proper review to you ?


So yeah... I agree with CDante. If people don't want youtubers to make money off their mods, they have a right to claim their video. Just like gaming companies can claim a video when you use their footage/content. Just look at Nintendo which claims a lot of videos, they do not allow reviews that much. I noticed a screenarcher who claimed a video for using their screenshot as thumbnail without proper credit.


EDIT : My bad, I admit I made a mistake and was quite rude for mentioning Juice. I just wanted to make a point to the first post on why some people might not want Youtubers to earn money for reviewing mods. I shouldn't have mentioned any names, unfortunately I was not thinking straight and therefore I wrote something without thinking about whom it may affect.

I sent an apology to you in a PM Juice, hopefully you read it and if you decide I'm the biggest asshole on the planet, I won't judge. I agree, what I did was stupid and rude, but I also admit when I'm stupid and rude. So hopefully I haven't offended too much and I hope my apology has helped in some way.

I won't edit the original comment because I won't hide the mistake of what I said, but I just wanted to prove a point on the topic at hand. I make mistakes sometimes... what can I say... I'm only human.

cdante wrote: sorry, don't really want to go into an argument about this subject, just want to make something clear before it totally gets misunderstood.

"...the idea was to add a feature that allows you to flag your mod pages whether you like your mods being reviewed or not.(...) with a feature like this, they could notify YouTubers that they don’t want their mods being used in this fashion. And as a result, YouTubers could do their mod searches with a filter and only review mods made by authors who are happy with this concept."

maybe I wasn't clear enough but what I meant by that would be an actual tool for mod authors. like a checkbox. like many other checkboxes mod authors have when they edit the attributes of their mods. if you checked it, it would mean you don't like reviews. (or you like them. doesn't matter which way). but it would create a new filter for the site's search engine. just like an NSFW tag or a non-adult-only filter.
youtubers who respect this decision would use this filter and wouldn't bother with mods whose creators don't want reviews.

sorry if I wasn't clear. gonna play the English is my second language card. ;)

juicehead3311 wrote: Well I'm sorry you feel I misrepresented your mods. I particularly enjoyed the content you were putting out and I do read through the lore behind many of your mods. Now at the same time I work with a time restriction. Condensing a multi-paragraph story into a few sentences is sometimes hard for me personally and I truly am sorry if the result was me misrepresenting what you wanted it to say. At the same I do remember that video and I did encourage everyone to read it over for themselves.

As for speculation videos I personally love opening up the dialogue. I like doing the research on different things and posting my speculations on it online. Those videos typically have more of a conversation going on in the comments and I enjoy the engagement they provide. Describing them as "just for views and money" is a gross simplification and not why I make YouTube videos.

I am deeply sorry that my content made you think less of me. I just feel sending me an email, a PM on here, or even reaching out to me on my discord like many others have is a much more appropriate way to fix those issues. Regardless, I will no longer make videos on your mods. I don't want you to feel that I am unjustly profiting off of your hard work and in the future I am more than happy to stop covering the content of any mod author. You guys create a ton of free and really cool content that I personally enjoy covering and experiencing. I do not just look at modding as easy money and views (I have a "pay the bills" job).

GamerPoets wrote: First, I enjoyed the interview = )
Second, I agree that folks should have their preference respected when they create something. I personally reach out to mod authors before creating videos about their mods because I don't want to waste my time creating something that isn't wanted. The only time that I do create a tutorial for something when I can't get a hold of the mod author is if I get enough comments asking me to do so, if a mod author hasn't responded at all (didn't say yes or no) and its a part of something that I base an entire guide around (personal policy). Though, here's my two cents...

This would cause a split in the community, if it was used. Many mod users will be annoyed (being on one side of the fence or the other) with either youtubers or mod authors. Many youtubers who agree to not create videos for those mods won't be able to show any mod lists that they create or have guides on that incorporate those mods so the youtuber would omit that mod all together and teach their viewers to not (indirectly) use those mods to follow their guides (and probably some would say directly not to use them). Then a question would arise...would there be a way to differentiate between whether or not tutorials and showcases are the same thing? If that same mod author wants a tutorial (due to many people complaining that they can't install it) how does he or she justify that one person can create something about their mod but another can't? (its preference, cool, I get it, but many won't "get it" and will be put off by it.) What if a youtuber has a lets play or a lets roleplay series and uses one of these mods in it? It would technically be showcasing the mod when it pops up in the LP. If that's allowed or if a youtuber just uses it in an LP regardless, viewers may ask (if they like the mod) for the youtuber to showcase it. Then the youtuber (the ones who reply to comments) would say they can't showcase it and state why. Then that viewer would form a sort of "annoyance" towards that mod author.... and the list of things that I could expand upon along these lines is too long for me to care to do so = )

So back to my initial statements. Let mod authors do what they want. I respect it either way but be mindful of what could and will (in some form or another) happen even if mod authors were simply encouraged to write on their descriptions (don't showcase my mod) but to not have it directly enforced some how (an honor system). There will still be a growing disconnect between those authors who flag their content and the people that bring their creations publicly to thousands and millions of people (even for innocent reasons) and it would open a door to split mod users, mod creators, and video viewers down the middle on various issues/questions.

Perhaps a better solution would be to find a way to flag video creators who misrepresent a modders creations and force them to produce a better product or to not create a video if they can't respect the mod. No one will be upset (at least not many) and most will respect (again, only a small few wouldn't) the mod authors for not wanting his or her creations misrepresented and the youtubers who obey their wishes. However, you just can't go "too far" with it because then you would get into the area of "you are modifying game content that wasn't yours to begin with (I get people bashing modders frequently in my comments and I ban them from my channel as I'm friends with a large number of mod authors) and you don't want others to modify what you have modified or to share it in videos or you want to put restrictions on what some do for a living... (news reporters report news whether you want them too or not, whether it's accurate or not, about any subject on earth or beyond, that they want to report and whether it properly represents the subject at hand or not and they make a living from it.. even if it ruins peoples lives). So again, even if you find the best possible way to implement something like that there will always be an opening for a large split in the community, for those who actually care about it. People love to hate people on the internet. Just give them a reason too. Even if you can't enforce a video restriction (which you can't) but "politely" flag your file as "do not create a video of said mod"(via an honor system) it will still create this type of controversy. And the only content (video) creators who would respect a modders wishes are ones who care about the community and the authors creations in the first place. So you would reduce good media production on your mod and only have videos out there by youtubers who could care less about an authors wishes in the first place.

If the solution was "you can use my mod in a video you just can't monetize it" then you are going to get people (myself included) who would simply opt out of the mod all together ( i create tutorials that take from 50 to 200 hours to create and barely make enough money to keep my channel alive no matter personal income). A youtuber who creates playlists of tutorials or "Must Have Mods" videos that doesn't show a good mod because it can't be monetized?... well re-read everything that I already wrote. In my position, it's not hard to see the many potential outcomes even when done innocently and with good intentions.

Loveblanket wrote: @Cdante. I understand where you are coming from now. I just wanted to point out that people that review anything should not be intimidated. They have the right to review and the review itself is allowed to make money, just like every movie reviewer and consumer reports system anywhere on earth and those that create have nothing to say about it and hopefully that won't change. It wasn't a direct attack on you or anything like that, I just feel that with recent events like the takedowns on youtubers and the very real lawsuits that even if you win cost real money, are an attempt to stifle free speech. It wasn't meant in any way at all as an insult to this article, I respect the s#*! out of you, I just don't want those that try to look out for consumers of any content to do so while having to worry about being in court for three years and how to pay their lawyers fees. If there was a misunderstanding, the fault was mine and I ask for your forgiveness. I just wish we could speak our minds without needing a lawyer on speed dial and of course that has nothing to do with you personally. Cheers.

Hopefully, my outlook can add to the conversation in a meaningful way. From my perspective, mod reviews should be welcomed. They're a great way of spreading the word about new mods, and placing the spotlight on up-and-coming mod authors.

Properly showcasing a mod (Youtube videos, news articles, ect.) is a win-win for both the mod author and the reviewer. Mod authors spend a lot of time on their work, and they deserve to have it seen by the largest audience possible. If reviewers want to collect ad revenue from showing off a mod, I don't see the harm in that. It's basically free publicity for the mod author. It's not much different from NexusMods' Staff Picks and Sunday Discussions, in that sense.

The smaller gaming communities especially benefit from reviews, since it raises awareness beyond the scope of NexusMods enthusiasts. This isn't an issue for Bethesda games, obviously, but the general public might not even be aware of mods for games like Darkest Dungeon and MGSV. Speaking on behalf of the latter, we appreciate all the attention we can get. If a reviewer makes some revenue from it, so be it. Like I mentioned, it's free advertising. Edited March 8, 2017 by morbidslinky