Donation Points system now live for mod authors on Nexus Mods

[Tydeous]

Disappointing that the store page is so limited. I had hoped to buy steam vouchers through it, maybe amazon, but I'll have to set up Paypal to get anything from this.

[Dark0ne]

In response to post #60351377.

Tydeous wrote: Disappointing that the store page is so limited. I had hoped to buy steam vouchers through it, maybe amazon, but I'll have to set up Paypal to get anything from this.

We'd love to offer Steam Gift Cards but Steam's system is absolutely bonkers. You need to be friends with someone for 3+ days before you can send a gift card to someone, and you cannot give a gift card to someone who is not in your friends list. It's an absolute nightmare for what we need it to do.

Amazon is equally a pain in the backside. There is no "universal" Amazon gift card that can be used on all the regional sites. Therefore, we would have to buy gift cards for amazon.com, amazon.co.uk, amazon.de, amazon.fr and so on and so forth and it would get very messy, very quickly. We would also have to do some sort of currency conversion rate within the DP store itself (e.g. 10,000 DP = $10 = £7.46) and it would fluctuate wildly or end up either costing us more money, or shortchanging our users.

It's like these big businesses don't want people to use their gift card system! Edited May 24, 2018 by Dark0ne

[Pickysaurus]

In response to post #60350682.

Reneer wrote:

I get what you're saying. You're right, it looks to be a flaw in the system. If the Nexus staff deem it to be "gaming the system" they will deal with it.

We do touch on cases like this in the Terms of Service for the system found here: https://help.nexusmods.com/article/68-donation-points-system-terms-of-service

But the system itself is designed to be very difficult to 'cheat' as it is.

[JosephRussell]

When is the first end-of-month report? At the end of May or June? :) The latter seems more logical but I thought I'd ask!

[Tydeous]

In response to post #60351377. #60352567 is also a reply to the same post.

Tydeous wrote: Disappointing that the store page is so limited. I had hoped to buy steam vouchers through it, maybe amazon, but I'll have to set up Paypal to get anything from this.

Dark0ne wrote: We'd love to offer Steam Gift Cards but Steam's system is absolutely bonkers. You need to be friends with someone for 3+ days before you can send a gift card to someone, and you cannot give a gift card to someone who is not in your friends list. It's an absolute nightmare for what we need it to do.

Amazon is equally a pain in the backside. There is no "universal" Amazon gift card that can be used on all the regional sites. Therefore, we would have to buy gift cards for amazon.com, amazon.co.uk, amazon.de, amazon.fr and so on and so forth and it would get very messy, very quickly. We would also have to do some sort of currency conversion rate within the DP store itself (e.g. 10,000 DP = $10 = £7.46) and it would fluctuate wildly or end up either costing us more money, or shortchanging our users.

It's like these big businesses don't want people to use their gift card system!

Thanks for taking the time to respond to me. I can see why you decided against offering them, it's a real shame for someone like me who really doesn't want to use Paypal, but I can't see a way around it.

Good luck with the roll out :)

[Hilli1]

I am not so happy about the mod authors donation system. I am afraid that it results in more drama between mod authors and mod authors and users as well. The amount of people complaining and moaning will increase probably.

 

I ported several mods from Oldrim to SSE. In the future it could be more difficult to get permissions I think (especially when the one who wants to port a mod, wants to earn DP's from it as well), because original authors could think: There ist somebody who will make money with MY mod or assets.

 

I really don't care about DP but many users do care. Personally I contacted (and still contacting) every single mod author whose mods I ported or assets I used and informed them about the new DP system. I asked if they want to get the DP's or not. In case I used assets from different authors in one mod, I informed them about the percentage they get. I always forward 100 percent of the DP's to the original authors. In case they don't want DP's as well, I turn the DP off for the specific mod.

 

It is a lot of work, but I think it's worth it. Transparency and honesty is the best way to establish mutual trust. Drama, jealousy and distrust can be avoided this way.

[dikr]

In response to post #60335881. #60349932 is also a reply to the same post.

Elianora wrote: My opinion on others "profiting from my art work" through Donation Points:



I have 126 mod pages, don't feel like updating the permissions on all of them.

Zeridian wrote: In my opinion, the permissions system should be account based and applied as a default template, then with an override available on each page you publish in case you want different permissions for the files hosted on that page. That way hugely active and hard working modders like you don't have to manage so many pages in such a ridiculously unwieldy way. The redesign of the Nexus hasn't really address any of its core failings in that manner.

I think that's the best possible way to approach the whole DP splitting debate. Also because patches and most translations require the original download and are only used by a niche within the entire group of users anyway. Original authors should be happy by other people taking the effort to spread their creativity to an even larger audience, (by doing mostly tedious work too).

[dikr]

In response to post #60350082. #60350272 is also a reply to the same post.

Reneer wrote:

Looking over the details, this system seems terrible as it is. Authors now have reason to no longer bundle files in one place for user friendliness. People like me, who make compatibility patches left behind from this system in that way. It's not glamorous work and this just makes it even less so. Not that I care about making any coffee money off this ridiculousness, but I have 50+ patches on one page...downloaded 10's of thousands of times but by 13k "unique" people. Instead, now there is all the incentive to just release a new page for every similar file. It's not any less exploitable because it's not per-file but per-page.

Except that if you split your 50 patches into 50 pages, you'll likely get 1/50 of the downloads for each patch, so likely around 260 unique downloads per patch. It's not as if people will download all 50 patches because they won't be using the underlying 50 mods the patches rely on (or are very unlikely to do so). There might be a small incentive to split mod variations into different pages, but it's unlikely going to somehow add up to 2x or 1.25x the downloads because people will only use one variation of the mod.

 

Now the issue I foresee as being a problem is if a mod author releases a "main file" on one mod page and then creates new mod pages for each patch / update, forcing users to "double dip" and inflate the overall unique download numbers. But I'm pretty sure that's against the rules somewhere already. Haven't found it yet, though.

Zeridian wrote: Except that they do, I have access to the data dude. That's simply not accurate in the least. There may be some reduction, but overall I would gain far more unique downloads by splitting them up, even if by the inconvenience some people somehow dismiss their need for the file.

As it is, if those files were split up, the unique downloads (as counted by this system) would go from 12-13k to around 120k. And that's being conservative and assuming some people would throw their arms up over the inconvenience. Why? The concept of supply and demand.

Edit: Not even that since my example is slightly off, because what we are shown is the unique downloads for the sum of the files for the page. The opt-in system uses unique users, not even total unique downloads on the page. So if you have 12-13k unique downloads, you aren't even getting that because the unique users is spread multiple times between those unique downloads per file. The incentive problem is still the same and exploitable though.

I could take what is potentially only 2000 unique user downloads (when I'm displayed 12k unique file downloads) and split the files into separate pages and see it multiply upwards to that figure, although it probably wouldn't hit the same amount. Probably in the range of 7-10k.

@Zeridian.

I agree. That's the only way I can see how people would be able to 'abuse' the system to maximize DP. But the question remains to what extend you can actually call it abuse.

If people split up their work in various patches and parts to individual pages, it would only slightly inconvenience users if provided with proper links and in that, it's a valid thing to do, I suppose. There are plenty of mods with only very minor changes or additions, as it is, and you can't really police 'completeness' or 'substance'.

Yet such a 'divide and conquer' strategy might backfire too: a combined / complete file with more quality content will probably get more thumbs up and votes translating in better exposure on the front page and maybe FOTM and with that, more downloads, compared to a mod which looks to be 'chopped up'.

p.s. Retroactively chopping up old, popular mods, seems a complete waste of effort in my eyes, as the peak of unique downloads will be gathered in the first months after release and become an ever thinning stream afterwards.

[Dark0ne]

In response to post #60350082. #60350272, #60355137 are all replies on the same post.

Reneer wrote:

Looking over the details, this system seems terrible as it is. Authors now have reason to no longer bundle files in one place for user friendliness. People like me, who make compatibility patches left behind from this system in that way. It's not glamorous work and this just makes it even less so. Not that I care about making any coffee money off this ridiculousness, but I have 50+ patches on one page...downloaded 10's of thousands of times but by 13k "unique" people. Instead, now there is all the incentive to just release a new page for every similar file. It's not any less exploitable because it's not per-file but per-page.

Except that if you split your 50 patches into 50 pages, you'll likely get 1/50 of the downloads for each patch, so likely around 260 unique downloads per patch. It's not as if people will download all 50 patches because they won't be using the underlying 50 mods the patches rely on (or are very unlikely to do so). There might be a small incentive to split mod variations into different pages, but it's unlikely going to somehow add up to 2x or 1.25x the downloads because people will only use one variation of the mod.

 

Now the issue I foresee as being a problem is if a mod author releases a "main file" on one mod page and then creates new mod pages for each patch / update, forcing users to "double dip" and inflate the overall unique download numbers. But I'm pretty sure that's against the rules somewhere already. Haven't found it yet, though.

Zeridian wrote: Except that they do, I have access to the data dude. That's simply not accurate in the least. There may be some reduction, but overall I would gain far more unique downloads by splitting them up, even if by the inconvenience some people somehow dismiss their need for the file.

As it is, if those files were split up, the unique downloads (as counted by this system) would go from 12-13k to around 120k. And that's being conservative and assuming some people would throw their arms up over the inconvenience. Why? The concept of supply and demand.

Edit: Not even that since my example is slightly off, because what we are shown is the unique downloads for the sum of the files for the page. The opt-in system uses unique users, not even total unique downloads on the page. So if you have 12-13k unique downloads, you aren't even getting that because the unique users is spread multiple times between those unique downloads per file. The incentive problem is still the same and exploitable though.

I could take what is potentially only 2000 unique user downloads (when I'm displayed 12k unique file downloads) and split the files into separate pages and see it multiply upwards to that figure, although it probably wouldn't hit the same amount. Probably in the range of 7-10k.

dikr wrote: @Zeridian.

I agree. That's the only way I can see how people would be able to 'abuse' the system to maximize DP. But the question remains to what extend you can actually call it abuse.

If people split up their work in various patches and parts to individual pages, it would only slightly inconvenience users if provided with proper links and in that, it's a valid thing to do, I suppose. There are plenty of mods with only very minor changes or additions, as it is, and you can't really police 'completeness' or 'substance'.

Yet such a 'divide and conquer' strategy might backfire too: a combined / complete file with more quality content will probably get more thumbs up and votes translating in better exposure on the front page and maybe FOTM and with that, more downloads, compared to a mod which looks to be 'chopped up'.

p.s. Retroactively chopping up old, popular mods, seems a complete waste of effort in my eyes, as the peak of unique downloads will be gathered in the first months after release and become an ever thinning stream afterwards.

This is covered in our Donation Point Terms and Service. We will moderate against this if people do it, and we will remove people's ability to use the DP system entirely if they continue to abuse the system based on our own interpretation of what constitutes abuse, not theirs.

If you have a mod, and you're patching that mod, that patch should always be on the same mod page and not a separate mod page. Edited May 24, 2018 by Dark0ne

[dikr]

In response to post #60350082. #60350272, #60355137, #60356532 are all replies on the same post.

Reneer wrote:

Looking over the details, this system seems terrible as it is. Authors now have reason to no longer bundle files in one place for user friendliness. People like me, who make compatibility patches left behind from this system in that way. It's not glamorous work and this just makes it even less so. Not that I care about making any coffee money off this ridiculousness, but I have 50+ patches on one page...downloaded 10's of thousands of times but by 13k "unique" people. Instead, now there is all the incentive to just release a new page for every similar file. It's not any less exploitable because it's not per-file but per-page.

Except that if you split your 50 patches into 50 pages, you'll likely get 1/50 of the downloads for each patch, so likely around 260 unique downloads per patch. It's not as if people will download all 50 patches because they won't be using the underlying 50 mods the patches rely on (or are very unlikely to do so). There might be a small incentive to split mod variations into different pages, but it's unlikely going to somehow add up to 2x or 1.25x the downloads because people will only use one variation of the mod.

 

Now the issue I foresee as being a problem is if a mod author releases a "main file" on one mod page and then creates new mod pages for each patch / update, forcing users to "double dip" and inflate the overall unique download numbers. But I'm pretty sure that's against the rules somewhere already. Haven't found it yet, though.

Zeridian wrote: Except that they do, I have access to the data dude. That's simply not accurate in the least. There may be some reduction, but overall I would gain far more unique downloads by splitting them up, even if by the inconvenience some people somehow dismiss their need for the file.

As it is, if those files were split up, the unique downloads (as counted by this system) would go from 12-13k to around 120k. And that's being conservative and assuming some people would throw their arms up over the inconvenience. Why? The concept of supply and demand.

Edit: Not even that since my example is slightly off, because what we are shown is the unique downloads for the sum of the files for the page. The opt-in system uses unique users, not even total unique downloads on the page. So if you have 12-13k unique downloads, you aren't even getting that because the unique users is spread multiple times between those unique downloads per file. The incentive problem is still the same and exploitable though.

I could take what is potentially only 2000 unique user downloads (when I'm displayed 12k unique file downloads) and split the files into separate pages and see it multiply upwards to that figure, although it probably wouldn't hit the same amount. Probably in the range of 7-10k.

dikr wrote: @Zeridian.

I agree. That's the only way I can see how people would be able to 'abuse' the system to maximize DP. But the question remains to what extend you can actually call it abuse.

If people split up their work in various patches and parts to individual pages, it would only slightly inconvenience users if provided with proper links and in that, it's a valid thing to do, I suppose. There are plenty of mods with only very minor changes or additions, as it is, and you can't really police 'completeness' or 'substance'.

Yet such a 'divide and conquer' strategy might backfire too: a combined / complete file with more quality content will probably get more thumbs up and votes translating in better exposure on the front page and maybe FOTM and with that, more downloads, compared to a mod which looks to be 'chopped up'.

p.s. Retroactively chopping up old, popular mods, seems a complete waste of effort in my eyes, as the peak of unique downloads will be gathered in the first months after release and become an ever thinning stream afterwards.

Dark0ne wrote: This is covered in our Donation Point Terms and Service. We will moderate against this if people do it, and we will remove people's ability to use the DP system entirely if they continue to abuse the system based on our own interpretation of what constitutes abuse, not theirs.

If you have a mod, and you're patching that mod, that patch should always be on the same mod page and not a separate mod page.

Thanks for the heads up, Dark0ne. Didn't even know that. I falsely assumed that multiple people uploading various files and fixes for the same source file carried over for original uploaders so that's kind of surprising to me. Only loophole I can see to circumvent that is using multiple accounts I suppose. But I reckon those would stand out quickly.