The Only Way to Opt Out from Mod Picker

[mlee3141]

Based on this post from TerrorFox1234,

 

 

Hi everyone,
 
We have written two documents responding to legal and ethical concerns, as well as our opt-out policy.
 
Regarding Opt-Out
 
Legal Status and Concerns
 
In regards to speculation about our moderation abilities and the idea that Mod Picker promotes anti-author behavior:
 
- Our terms of service and community guidelines will expressly forbid users from any outward or obvious anti-author behavior.
- Our moderation team will enforce strict guidelines which will not allow such behavior.
- Speculation about our ability to achieve these goals serves no purpose. You can make statements supported by evidence about our ability to create a community to your liking once our platform has launched.
 
 
Sincerely,
The Mod Picker Team

 

it appears that the Mod Picker team blatantly disrespects and disregards the rights of all Mod Authors, and the only way to protect our content from being scraped, then added to their site against our explicit wishes is to hide all of our mods here, on the Nexus. I've already done the same. Who's with me?

[mlee3141]

Also, I misspelled the title. It should be "Opt Out". I would be most appreciative if someone could correct that for me. Thanks!

[mlee3141]

I already have! It's hosted on Mediafire, and I've already posted links on every modding site I could find out there. Here's the one for AFK Mods; take a look:

 

http://www.afkmods.com/index.php?/topic/4407-aurlyn-20-release/#entry159790

 

Oh, and the version is current. If you need the patches/ optional files, just let me know, and I'll put these up as well.

 

Also, I hope you don't think I'm acting too extreme! I'm actually quite a reasonable person, but will defend myself/ my work against those who threaten to bring about the demise of the Modding Community.

[Arthmoor]

Also, I misspelled the title. It should be "Opt Out". I would be most appreciative if someone could correct that for me. Thanks!

Fixed

 

And personally, I echo what JC is saying. There was merit to the idea, but they just seemed so determined to evade addressing author concerns. I am among those considering hiding my mods. I don't want to, because really the fans aren't the ones caught up in all this. They know where to come find information and support for my work already, and that's on sites I posted it to or made my own threads for elsewhere. The Mod Picker team simply isn't making it easy and they're essentially leaving us no choice though.

[mlee3141]

Exactly, Arthmoor. I would have at least watched neutrally, even after they mocked my concerns in their original thread in the Skyrim Mod Talk section, but after watching them do the same to everyone who posted n the Mod Author forums, I felt like something needed to be done. It's a shame though; it seems like people enjoy my work, and now have to look elsewhere to find it.

[mlee3141]

For those who wish to download Aurlyn even after I've hidden the mod page in protest of Mod Picker; you can find all of the relevant information below. All links here are current, unless otherwise stated. Description and credits located in the Aurlyn ReadMe odt file, found in the Aurlyn Info folder, in the Main File. Thanks!

 

Main File:

 

http://www.mediafire...awnstone 2-3.7z

 

Optional Files:

 

http://www.mediafire...ance-66160-.zip

 

http://www.mediafire...ce 2-66160-.zip

 

http://www.mediafire...word-66160-.zip

 

http://www.mediafire...rd 2-66160-.zip

 

http://www.mediafire...ate Sword 3.zip

 

http://www.mediafire...ate Sword 4.zip

 

http://www.mediafire...ate Sword 5.zip

 

http://www.mediafire...ate Sword 6.zip

 

http://www.mediafire...ate Sword 7.zip

 

http://www.mediafire...ate Sword 8.zip

 

http://www.mediafire...issal Patch.zip

 

Miscellaneous:

 

http://www.mediafire...ts 1-66160-.zip

 

http://www.mediafire...Aurlyn Voice.7z

[lmstearn]

Hiding mods? Can't believe that things have come to this so quickly.

That er Legal Status and Concerns was a bit of shock. Expecting 250 pages of legal blurb. There's nothing there!

This kind of thing should be settled under some kind of legal framework. But what do we have?

Wonder what Dark0ne would think when over time the scraping software is capable of scraping much more of the site's content than what is planned?

[mlee3141]

All links have now been disabled, thanks to a certain toxic post over on the Reddit SkyrimMods, even after I showed extreme objectivity by posting a copy of my mod link compendium there. I apologize to the users, and I sincerely hope that Aurlyn will be publicly available shortly.

[mlee3141]

Glad to hear, JC!

[Arthmoor]

I know that Reddit is generally a cesspool, but do keep in mind, Nazenn isn't someone I'd consider part of the toxic community. He does a lot of good for Skyrim, especially on the Steam forums. It's entirely possible he sees what Mod Picker is doing as a valuable service and just doesn't fully grasp why we object to it.

 

If the goal is to convince him or others like him, might I suggest scaling back on the hyperbolic rhetoric and instead presenting a bit less of a dramatic case?

[Netrve]

It has been explained numerous times on why an Opt-In system doesn't work for this kind of project. Imagine Wikipedia using an Opt-In system or how about PCPartPicker. Neither of the two would work on an Opt-In bases.

It's literally the same principle, I can only assume objecting this comes from misunderstanding the project itself.

 

I know that Reddit is generally a cesspool, but do keep in mind, Nazenn isn't someone I'd consider part of the toxic community. He does a lot of good for Skyrim, especially on the Steam forums. It's entirely possible he sees what Mod Picker is doing as a valuable service and just doesn't fully grasp why we object to it.

 

If the goal is to convince him or others like him, might I suggest scaling back on the hyperbolic rhetoric and instead presenting a bit less of a dramatic case?

 

To be honest, neither do I. I would be happy and grateful to get a proper explanation of the side against Mod Picker, because so far the only reasons I heard are against the Reviews and the descriptions Mod Picker generates for the submissions.

Especially the latter lacks a proper explanation as of why it's a problem. I heard people claim Mod Picker takes assets and esp data, thus infringing on your copyrights, but that's not how it works. Some of the best examples of the system are https://pcpartpicker.com/ or https://steamdb.info/ . Both have very similar principles like Mod Picker.

 

From what I have heard and understand, it basically applies a xEdit conflict filter to your mod (and the vanilla records) and notes what records have been edited. It does not save how something has been edited, just that it has been edited.

 

Like I said, if I could get a proper explanation on what the problems are and why, I would be happy and thankful. When I first heard about Mod Picker I was against it as well, but after it has been explained to me in detail I corrected my point of view. I'm not someone who relentlessly persists on his PoV, I try to understand the various aspects and positions, but so far I haven't been able to fully comprehend what the opposite side's arguments are.

[Roy Batty]

There are several reasons for mod authors stance, let me try to explain some of them objectively from my own point of view. I do not speak for other authors, let me make that perfectly clear.

 

The first and biggest one is that it has been brought to light that the proposed site is a business venture, to make money, albeit indirectly, from mods. I suspected this from the very beginning.

 

The second one would be that it proposes to circumvent the relation of mod author and mod user in favor of their own system. We as mod authors have enough trouble with our spare time helping the users of our mods on nexus and elsewhere. Many of us simply to do not have the time or inclination to moderate another site to stifle misinformation or address issues. That's not to say we mind other people helping out in that regard, quite the contrary. It just needs to be in the place(s) where we provide that support.

 

As for the reasoning behind "ratings". We release these things freely to the public out of generosity, we ask and cannot ask anything in return. To put a review and rating system on them is an entitled slap in our collective faces.

 

On the technical side of it, there's not an xEdit script in the world (and never will be) that can completely resolve conflicts especially when it comes to scripts, worldspace/cell objects, and navmeshes among other things. There are an abundance of such conflicts and making a patch for them in xEdit without intimate knowledge of the mods involved or modding in general is impossible.

 

This opens another concern which has since gone unmentioned here, but I have touched on in the nexus thread. If such as the above mentioned conflicts are impossible to resolve in that way, then unauthorized patches may possibly be created and distributed based on this collected data without the authors consent or knowledge. There was already a very heated discussion about exactly these things after the paid modding fiasco.

 

The final thing I will mention, is the perception that they are putting users above the authors. They have stated so in the way they have handled things, that they value the user more than the author. Without the authors there would be no users. Again I believe this to be a perception that users are entitled to our work, which they are most certainly not.

 

I hope this can bring some understanding to at least my own point of view on this matter.

[Netrve]

There are several reasons for mod authors stance, let me try to explain some of them objectively from my own point of view. I do not speak for other authors, let me make that perfectly clear.

 

1) The first and biggest one is that it has been brought to light that the proposed site is a business venture, to make money, albeit indirectly, from mods. I suspected this from the very beginning. I'm not against them getting rewarded for offering a service, but I can understand the frustration Mod Authors get.

 

2) The second one would be that it proposes to circumvent the relation of mod author and mod user in favor of their own system. We as mod authors have enough trouble with our spare time helping the users of our mods on nexus and elsewhere. Many of us simply to do not have the time or inclination to moderate another site to stifle misinformation or address issues. That's not to say we mind other people helping out in that regard, quite the contrary. It just needs to be in the place(s) where we provide that support.

 

3) As for the reasoning behind "ratings". We release these things freely to the public out of generosity, we ask and cannot ask anything in return. To put a review and rating system on them is an entitled slap in our collective faces.

 

4) On the technical side of it, there's not an xEdit script in the world (and never will be) that can completely resolve conflicts especially when it comes to scripts, worldspace/cell objects, and navmeshes among other things. There are an abundance of such conflicts and making a patch for them in xEdit without intimate knowledge of the mods involved or modding in general is impossible.

 

5) This opens another concern which has since gone unmentioned here, but I have touched on in the nexus thread. If such as the above mentioned conflicts are impossible to resolve in that way, then unauthorized patches may possibly be created and distributed based on this collected data without the authors consent or knowledge. There was already a very heated discussion about exactly these things after the paid modding fiasco.

 

6) The final thing I will mention, is the perception that they are putting users above the authors. They have stated so in the way they have handled things, that they value the user more than the author. Without the authors there would be no users. Again I believe this to be a perception that users are entitled to our work, which they are most certainly not.

 

I hope this can bring some understanding to at least my own point of view on this matter.

 

Before I begin I wanna say thank you for the effort and time you put into that post.

I've taken the freedom to enumerate the points you made, so I can address them easier.

 

1) Nothing I can object here. I thought it would be setup as non-profit service, but after learning it won't I can understand the anger of the Mod Authors for this point.

 

2.1) The submissions to MP shouldn't actually leave room for misinformation, as most details are of technical nature outside of the user's influence.

 

2.2) The reviews are a way to give users a way to share their opinion about a mod, not to have them share their installation issues. There's not much to control there as this is basically freedom of speech (excluding personal vendettas/insults and really flat out misleading reviews, but that's what the staff should take care of). I can imagine that certain modders would have a problem with that. There are modders which abuse the power they are given over at Nexusmods. I've seen them delete user comments providing (constructive) critique and banning them or modders setting misleading tags to bypass filters. Modders shouldn't have the power to do that at all, at least not without a  control instance. Imagine industries having the same amount of control. Reviews getting deleted because they critique their product. The Play Store or App Store without reviews telling you about possible problems with apps (like the FB app draining your battery or an app simply not functioning). Yes, reviews can be sometimes dumb (Steam Reviews for example), but the majority is helpful. If something is free or not doesn't really matter here.

 

3) I've heard this argument quite often, but I have a problem with it. It doesn't matter if you are generous by offering a mod for free or not, you are providing a product. This thought that providing something for free grants immunity from personal opinions is, in my opinion, wrong and undermines the right of everyone to say what they think. Don't get me wrong, I have respect for modders, but no matter they should be still open to opinions. A mod can be bad or good, what went into it and that it's free doesn't change that. You can be unreasonable unfair when reviewing a mod, but that's another topic.

 

4) That's true, conflicts will never be completely resolvable, but it's still important for the user to know about them. No one is trying to force MAs to make patches, that would be insane. Theoretically every mod user has to go into xEdit and check their load order to avoid problems, MP does that in a way. It tells the user about possible problems, just like the manual operation would do.

 

5) I'm not sure, but is this an inherent problem of MP? I mean, everyone can go into xEdit, see a problem and patch it. Maybe MP could cause more users to become aware of conflicts, but if this will cause more patches to be made is a question we can't answer.

 

6) MP is primarily a service for the users, modders come second there, from what I can tell. But it's important to understand that neither party stands above the other; MAs and users depend on each other. Without MAs there wouldn't be mods, without users there is no use in mods. Demand and supply go hand in hand, that's an economic principle. Of course it's a bit more complex than that. I know it might sound unfair, but think about the relations you have to other entities. For example to Bethesda. A lot of us have hundreds if not thousands of hours spent on their games, but we still can criticize them and their games. Yes, we paid for the game, but product is product. What you spent on something doesn't really influence the opinion you are allowed have and express.

 

I hope I understood your concerns right and addressed them in a fair manner. If not, please tell me. I will try to do my best to correct it then.

I do share the concern about the monetization, I agree that them making a profit would be unfair to the original authors.

Also I know it might sound like I don't appreciate what Mod Authors do, but I do. I know how much work it takes to make a mod and I know how draining providing support can be, especially with some users being especially dumb (can I say that here? ^^). I didn't release mods I've made myself, because of reasons like that. I don't have the time, motivation and/or patience to deal with users, so huge respect to those who do.

But I guess I have to at some point if we release our game...well at least we can hire a community manager to do the talking!

 

Greetings,

Netrve

 

EDIT: I had to correct myself at point 1 after learning a few things.

[Roy Batty]

2/3 ) I think there needs to be a distinction between what kind of review we're talking about here. A synopsis would be acceptable to me and possibly others, a review is not. Sure we are providing a "product" be we are under no obligation to provide support for it any more than a book author, musician, painter or movie director is. It's here ya go, YMMV. Users can say whatever they like about something, but it's a conflict of interest to link opinions and a rating to something which is supposed to be helping solve technical issues. These are objective things that need to be handled and addressed, not opinionated ones.

 

This is an interesting point I will bring up in the new thread on nexus. This lack of clear distinction I think is a major issue.

 

I'm not going to get into how MA's handle their own comment sections, I might not agree with how some of them handle it but it's not my business.

 

Thank you for your comments, they are clear and concise and I will think about what you've said.

[Arthmoor]

Since these issues are being worked out after a change in tone, would there be any objections to locking both of these threads?

[mlee3141]

No. Go ahead.