Why are mod authors allowed to ban people from seeing their mod?

[Deleted82156User]

 

I have nothing against modders,..

 

 

Nexus has always greatly valued mod authors over users in literally anything forever to the point of insanity

On the list of noxious things mod authors are allowed to get away with

I've seen people act like they are superior because they know how to use Creation Kit,

This community already encourages modders to live in a bubble away from criticism far too often, this is just a leap into insanity.

You don't, Nexus already coddles mod makers to the point

 

You clearly don't like the way modders are given the right to handle their work here and have a problem with the way modders behave here as well, that goes outside and beyond the one particular experience you are complaining about. As evidenced in your many remarks above.

 

Your comments come across quite aggressively in that regard. So whether or not you intended it, you really do come across as having a problem with the modders and their behavior here.

 

I am not angry, I am providing the reasons why your 'offense' at the modders in general on this site is unwarranted. However I am not going to make judgement on the modder banning you in this specific case, I don't have all the facts. Was it fair...was it not fair..I don't know. All I know is that it was the modder's right to 'refuse service'.

 

Really though at this point it is a moot point...

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't remember ever mentioning that we should lose a feature like blocking/banning people. I only believe that the concept of people blocking others for unfair reasons could be mitigated with some intervention, that's all. This doesn't mean everyone shouldn't have the right to block others.

 

 

Given that the complaints are against the existence of the feature itself, it is a clear indication that those people want it removed.

Edited March 7, 2017 by Guest

[Arthmoor]

@Arthmoor: just because LL's bog standard software doesn't allow it doesn't mean we'd switch to it as soon as it did. I'd advise against it because it seems like just another source of drama. I don't remember anybody ever even requesting such a feature with us, so it's probably not all that necessary.

It only seems to be a source of drama from the ones who get banned by authors using the controls they've been given. Pretty much every case of it I've seen turns out to have been justified in some way once the author's side comes out.

 

Not saying you guys should do something to provide it or implement it if IPB somehow did so on their own (fat chance, they took stuff away in IPB4 even) but it's certainly not something to dismiss because a few disgruntled agitators hate it.

[ObieDwyer]

Modders can and should be able to control what they want, I don't really give a s***, but banning specific individuals from downloading their mods is honestly pretty childish and a really weird feature. It seems like its designed as a literal 'f*** you' button that's just going to cause more tension than it would solve. If you want to remove comments or disable them entirely then fine, I get that some people just don't want to deal with that, but prohibiting people from downloading your mod is just a needless punishment imo. It's like if you made a comment (negative or not) on someone's youtube video and they decided that you should never be able to watch something from their channel again, that'd just be absurd.

I can't really argue against modders being more valuable than the average user and that they should have some control over their content but the author that banned you honestly did it for a pretty petty reason.

I agree with DoctaSax. If modders don't want to hear people talking trash then fine, they don't have to, but banning people from your mods seems excessive and prone to abuse.

Edited March 7, 2017 by Cdr248

[DoctaSax]

 

@Arthmoor: just because LL's bog standard software doesn't allow it doesn't mean we'd switch to it as soon as it did. I'd advise against it because it seems like just another source of drama. I don't remember anybody ever even requesting such a feature with us, so it's probably not all that necessary.

It only seems to be a source of drama from the ones who get banned by authors using the controls they've been given. Pretty much every case of it I've seen turns out to have been justified in some way once the author's side comes out.

 

Not saying you guys should do something to provide it or implement it if IPB somehow did so on their own (fat chance, they took stuff away in IPB4 even) but it's certainly not something to dismiss because a few disgruntled agitators hate it.

 

Fair enough. I won't argue against the idea that most of the people who complain about being treated unfairly probably weren't. I will allow for exceptions though. Being a modder doesn't make people automatically right 100% of the time. As a modder, I can say that.

 

Drama is drama though. The point isn't who starts it, but who needs it.

[Arthmoor]

 

It's like if you made a comment (negative or not) on someone's youtube video and they decided that you should never be able to watch something from their channel again, that'd just be absurd.

 

I don't know the inner workings of Youtube, but can't channel operators already do this? I know they can ban users from commenting on individual videos because the Youtubers I talk to regularly mention doing that all the time.

[Reneer]

Business / organization owners have the right to refuse service. Big and small companies refuse service / ban people from using their services all the time. Mod authors are like small little storefronts and the Nexus is the landowner. If you go up to someone's storefront and insult them or otherwise piss them off they have every right to ban you from their storefront or refuse you service. Determining whether or not a ban was ethical or fair or not isn't the point - it is the right of the storefront owner to do so as long as they haven't violated any laws. And complaining to the landowner, when they have flatly stated that they support the right of mod authors to ban people from their mods, isn't likely going to change anything.

Edited March 7, 2017 by Reneer

[ObieDwyer]

 

 

It's like if you made a comment (negative or not) on someone's youtube video and they decided that you should never be able to watch something from their channel again, that'd just be absurd.

 

I don't know the inner workings of Youtube, but can't channel operators already do this? I know they can ban users from commenting on individual videos because the Youtubers I talk to regularly mention doing that all the time.

 

 

I should reiterate that I'm fine with blocking communication with people. People on youtube can mute certain individuals if they want and they can disable or delete comments entirely if they want, but IIRC there's no functionality that allows them to ban people from watching their videos.

 

And I don't think the business example is entirely fair as businesses have more overlap than most mods. If you're banned at a pizzeria there are at least 30 other pizzeria's in my area that I can go to and get a similar experience. Mods however are a little more comparable to art. Some mods are completely unique and offer experiences you might not be able to get from other places, an author that bans a user would be like a movie director who tries to literally make it illegal for a specific person to watch his movie, it's just a bit much.

 

Another thing on businesses being able to refuse service is that those businesses usually don't abuse that power, because there are legal limitations. In a perfect world, nexus authors wouldn't be trigger happy with the ban button, but some are and there's really nothing stopping them from doing whatever they want with it. Imagine if a nexus author just started banning anyone that had an anime avatar or someshit, leaving hundreds unable to access the mod on the nexus just because the author doesn't like anime avatars. It's hypothetical but it's totally possible. Now obviously the best thing to do is to not s#*! on mod authors, but what counts as shitting on someone differs between person to person and (like i said above) authors could just ban you because they simply feel like it. You can say something supportive or have a legitimate question and then find out you're blocked off from a dozen mods or so. Just seems a little stupid imo.

[Reneer]

And I don't think the business example is entirely fair as businesses have more overlap than most mods. If you're banned at a pizzeria there are at least 30 other pizzeria's in my area that I can go to and get a similar experience. Mods however are a little more comparable to art. Some mods are completely unique and offer experiences you might not be able to get from other places, an author that bans a user would be like a movie director who tries to literally make it illegal for a specific person to watch his movie, it's just a bit much.

If you go into an artist's personal studio / gallery and piss them off, guess what? You don't get access to their art anymore through them after they ban you. Simply because that artist is the only artist whose style you liked isn't their problem.

 

Another thing on businesses being able to refuse service is that those businesses usually don't abuse that power, because there are legal limitations. In a perfect world, nexus authors wouldn't be trigger happy with the ban button, but some are and there's really nothing stopping them from doing whatever they want with it. Imagine if a nexus author just started banning anyone that had an anime avatar or someshit, leaving hundreds unable to access the mod on the nexus just because the author doesn't like anime avatars. It's hypothetical but it's totally possible. Now obviously the best thing to do is to not s*** on mod authors, but what counts as s***ing on someone differs between person to person and (like i said above) authors could just ban you because they simply feel like it. You can say something supportive or have a legitimate question and then find out you're blocked off from a dozen mods or so. Just seems a little stupid imo.

And what laws are those, exactly? A business is perfectly within its rights to ban anyone they want for almost any reason. Don't like a guy's shoes? You can ban him from your store if you want. Did she come up to you and tell you that she didn't like what you were selling? Perfectly fine to ban that person. What you can't do is ban someone from your store and cite the reason of their gender / race / sexual orientation / disability / etc.

 

If you go into a 5-star restaurant wearing an anime t-shirt, they likely aren't going to serve you. Is that unfair? Possibly. But it's their right to do so. If you raise a stink about not being served while wearing your anime t-shirt, they may just ban you from their establishment. Which is also within their right to do so.

Edited March 7, 2017 by Reneer

[Mightandmarine]

 

 

I have nothing against modders,..

 

 

Nexus has always greatly valued mod authors over users in literally anything forever to the point of insanity

On the list of noxious things mod authors are allowed to get away with

I've seen people act like they are superior because they know how to use Creation Kit,

This community already encourages modders to live in a bubble away from criticism far too often, this is just a leap into insanity.

You don't, Nexus already coddles mod makers to the point

 

You clearly don't like the way modders are given the right to handle their work here and have a problem with the way modders behave here as well, that goes outside and beyond the one particular experience you are complaining about. As evidenced in your many remarks above.

 

Your comments come across quite aggressively in that regard. So whether or not you intended it, you really do come across as having a problem with the modders and their behavior here.

 

I am not angry, I am providing the reasons why your 'offense' at the modders in general on this site is unwarranted. However I am not going to make judgement on the modder banning you in this specific case, I don't have all the facts. Was it fair...was it not fair..I don't know. All I know is that it was the modder's right to 'refuse service'.

 

Given that the complaints are against the existence of the feature itself, it is a clear indication that those people want it removed.

 

I don't like the way modders are placed on a pedestal and get to treat end users like s#*! just because they spend time making something. I rarely see this in modding communities outside of the Nexus, mostly because on the Nexus these opinions are extremely prevalent, and the community supports it. People have been dealing with trolls criticizing them since modding was first created, but only on the Nexus can mod makers so thoroughly censor people for the pettiest of reasons. I have a problem with the rules, not the modders, because it's the rules that facilitate the bad behavior.

 

And nobody here wants blocking, censoring, or deleting removed, or at least nobody is arguing it here, people are arguing a mod maker has no reason to have the ability to wholesale blacklist users from even seeing their mod. Problems with mod users censoring comments and criticism is an entirely different issue, the one being discussed is on mod blacklisting.

 

Moving on to later comments.

 

It doesn't matter what US law over small businesses state, it's a useless argument that detracts from any real argument on what's wrong with the system. The Nexus isn't a 5-star classy restaurant and it's not your local store, and it's not based upon supply + demand economics so the basics of the law itself is meaningless here. It's rules entirely set up by admins, who made these rules because they wish it to be so.

 

Constantly turning this argument into "mod makers vs. hordes of people who just want to be mean and don't appreciate the amazing effort they put out" isn't productive either because it has nothing to do with the argument. Not a single person in this thread has argued against the mod maker's right to control the distribution of their mod. Nobody disagrees with their right to mute, silence, delete and whatever else comments and commentators whether for good or ill. The problem here comes from a mod authors ability to effectively block out people from downloading their mod for no purpose. It accomplishes nothing besides satisfying some petty grudge.

 

I'll live without the HD nail mod that was being offered, but if, say, Chesko decided that anybody with a furry or anime avatar should be banned from even seeing all of his mods then it'd be absolute crap. It's an exploitable system and pretending like the mod maker can do no wrong is just being blissfully ignorant. If someone insults the mod creator (or, God forbid, posts a comment that isn't a bug report or empty praise), they can be blocked and never speak to the creator again, but having them never download their mod doesn't do anything besides fulfill a grudge.

 

And hey, maybe that'd be fine if the page you hit when this happen didn't explicitly say "deal with it, we don't care." The page basically says the mod author is infallible, and can dictate whatever he wishes for whatever reason. There's zero recourse for any wrongdoing on the part of the mod creator.

[Scoutbr0]

I believe modders definitively are worth more than users since they are the website's content aggregators and are responsible for bringing an influx of users to it. There is no denial in that. But it doesn't excuse them to be toxic toward their userbase. While good manners are expected of user, a tighter and more mature attitude from authors should also be expected on the Nexus otherwise we end up with ban-happy like those. As a modder myself, it abhorres me when I see people who think they are superior or better than others and demand satisfaction by deleting negative constructive cricitism.

While I believe banning people from downloading your mod is incredibly childish, what stops the banned from logging out, downloading it and logging back in (unless its an IP-based ban)? Having this in place only encourages ban-happy modders and toxic attitudes within the community. Sometimes one should indeed block a person who's been pestering and never fully content with a mod that's not to their liking, but this should be a last resort. That user should download the mod the way it is or not download at all.