Why was Bodytalk Deleted?

[TheBottomhoodofSteel]

19 hours ago, OH1972 said:

 

Except they allowed existing authors to opt out.  And except that you agreed to those terms with the EULA. And except that those terms are perfectly standard for distributors of content.

 

And expecting others to invest substantial sums of money so you can benefit from it and then accusing them of only "seeing the cash end of it" is pretty rich.

It says volumes that you expect 24/7 server access with massive bandwidth (needed given the number of mods on Nexus and the number of people downloading from there) and then have the audacity to sling mud at people when they "see the cash side of it". Newsflash: Money doesn't grow on trees. 

 

Nexus only allowed Existing authors to "opt out" after massive backlash to them doing this behind our backs. 

I see you didn't actually read anything else tho, so I'm not gonna even give you more than two sentences. 

[TheBottomhoodofSteel]

19 hours ago, OH1972 said:

 

Collections are not being paywalled. The one-click functionality is reserved for premium users, which makes sense since they get higher bandwidth, which makes one-click downloads practical to begin with. Non-premium users can still use collections, they just need to download the mods one by one - which given the lower bandwith isn't half bad, since it allows you to take a break and do something else. It's still a massive step up from investing days into a new setup.

 

To quote Polygon: "As a comparison, downloading a list of 50 mods for Valheim took the mod staff 11 minutes as a free user; with a premium account, it took 3 minutes."

They're still using author works to drive a profit, something many authors actually don't like, especially when they don't have the option of participating or not in this system. 

[OH1972]

18 hours ago, TheBottomhoodofSteel said:

Nexus only allowed Existing authors to "opt out" after massive backlash to them doing this behind our backs. 

I see you didn't actually read anything else tho, so I'm not gonna even give you more than two sentences. 

 

I see YOU are the one who didn't read anything and routinely blame others for your own mistakes.

You agreed to licensing your work indefinitely. 

[OH1972]

18 hours ago, TheBottomhoodofSteel said:

They're still using author works to drive a profit, something many authors actually don't like, especially when they don't have the option of participating or not in this system. 

 

YOU are using THEIR system for distribution. If you write a letter to a newspaper, you agree that they get to archive it. If you write a scientific article, you agree that the journal gets indefinitely license to archive and republish it. All without getting a dime for it. That's how things are with unsolicited content. If someone asks you explicity "Hey, could you write me a mod that does XYZ?" then you can charge them for that. Other than that, be happy that you get to benefit from their services. 

 

You do have the option of participating or not - if you do not distribute your mods via Nexus, the whole issue is moot. But if you want to use their hardware and their work, then getting outraged that they seek to recover the costs is ludicrous.

[TheBottomhoodofSteel]

9 hours ago, OH1972 said:

 

I see YOU are the one who didn't read anything and routinely blame others for your own mistakes.

You agreed to licensing your work indefinitely. 

I did not, nor was I ever aware of them changing their TOS until recently when they made it a big deal you had to actually scroll through... Previous version (the one I agreed to on signup) never stated indefinite licensing, They changed it without warning or awareness a few times (Keep in mind, if they tried to take it up with a lawyer that I agreed to this, it would get tossed out. They'd have to prove I was aware of it (and agreed) when they initially made the changes during the Rollout of the archive feature).

Maybe you should have several seats because you're talking out of your ass without any prior context, thanks. I don't care to deal with idiots like you who ain't been following this wanting to act like they have some knowledge because they can read a page that's been changed, especially ones that pick the wrong person to try to argue with. 



And as far as your other quote, I dipped off Nexus, so your point is? They implemented a change to drive up Premium sales by forcing authors into a system authors never agreed with behind our backs. Even if it's to recover costs, it's sleazy as fuck to do that shit and I don't agree with it. They chose driving premium sales by forcing authors into an unwanted system. 

Edited November 20, 2021 by TheBottomhoodofSteel

[Reginald_001]

On 11/20/2021 at 8:37 AM, TheBottomhoodofSteel said:

I did not, nor was I ever aware of them changing their TOS until recently when they made it a big deal you had to actually scroll through... Previous version (the one I agreed to on signup) never stated indefinite licensing, They changed it without warning or awareness a few times (Keep in mind, if they tried to take it up with a lawyer that I agreed to this, it would get tossed out. They'd have to prove I was aware of it (and agreed) when they initially made the changes during the Rollout of the archive feature).

Maybe you should have several seats because you're talking out of your ass without any prior context, thanks. I don't care to deal with idiots like you who ain't been following this wanting to act like they have some knowledge because they can read a page that's been changed, especially ones that pick the wrong person to try to argue with. 



And as far as your other quote, I dipped off Nexus, so your point is? They implemented a change to drive up Premium sales by forcing authors into a system authors never agreed with behind our backs. Even if it's to recover costs, it's sleazy as fuck to do that shit and I don't agree with it. They chose driving premium sales by forcing authors into an unwanted system. 

You are right. Don't let the copyright troll get you on edge.

It's your work.

 

PERIOD.

 

And no amount of FUCKING small lettering or ENTITLED BITCH'S TROLLING can take that away from you.

Edited November 21, 2021 by Reginald_001

[steelpanther24]

3 hours ago, Reginald_001 said:

You are right. Don't let the copyright troll get you on edge.

It's your work.

 

PERIOD.

 

And no amount of FUCKING small lettering or ENTITLED BITCH'S TROLLING can take that away from you.

Normally, I tend to be more in line with Reginald and TheBottomhoodofSteel's opinions but here, I don't think it is as easy as you claim:

 

"At their core, game mods are derivative works (Steelpanther's emphasis). A modification needs to run on the original work in order for the mod itself to work. As a game modder, you own some limited copyrights in what you created but what you created is likely copyright infringement.

The easiest way to think about how game mods fit into the copyright scene is to think about an art gallery. Creating a game mod is similar to going into an art gallery, pulling a painting off the wall, and putting a painting inside of the painting. You own what you created but your creation is infringing on the original artist’s copyright to do it unless they’ve given you the right to do it." [1]

 

"Paid mods are making this situation more complicated, as Valve Corporation found out in 2015 when over 133,000 people signed a petition to end the paid mod feature. Mod packs, groups of mods, also have legal issues. And making things even more complex, mods are often distributed without consent of the original mod creator." [1]

 

and

 

"A more interesting question is who owns the copyright of content created in a game using third-party software. Both sides would have at least a partial claim; the game producer made the backbone while the gamer made the specific mod. In the end, it seems very similar to the Microsoft Paint example mentioned earlier. However, cases such as Micro Star v. FormGen Inc., 154 F.3d 1107 (1998) seem to suggest that courts consider user-generated works as derivative content belonging to the copyright owner. This case does not fit the situation of content-created with third party software exactly, so there may be some space for such content to be considered owned by its creator." [2]

 

[1] Odin Law and Media; 7Feb18; "Who owns my mod?" by guest blogger; https://odinlaw.com/who-owns-my-game-mod/

[2] The NYU Journal of Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law; 29Feb16; "The IP Implications of Video Game Mods"; https://blog.jipel.law.nyu.edu/2016/02/the-ip-implications-of-video-game-mods/

[TheBottomhoodofSteel]

27 minutes ago, steelpanther24 said:

Normally, I tend to be more in line with Reginald and TheBottomhoodofSteel's opinions but here, I don't think it is as easy as you claim:

 

"At their core, game mods are derivative works (Steelpanther's emphasis). A modification needs to run on the original work in order for the mod itself to work. As a game modder, you own some limited copyrights in what you created but what you created is likely copyright infringement.

The easiest way to think about how game mods fit into the copyright scene is to think about an art gallery. Creating a game mod is similar to going into an art gallery, pulling a painting off the wall, and putting a painting inside of the painting. You own what you created but your creation is infringing on the original artist’s copyright to do it unless they’ve given you the right to do it." [1]

 

"Paid mods are making this situation more complicated, as Valve Corporation found out in 2015 when over 133,000 people signed a petition to end the paid mod feature. Mod packs, groups of mods, also have legal issues. And making things even more complex, mods are often distributed without consent of the original mod creator." [1]

 

and

 

"A more interesting question is who owns the copyright of content created in a game using third-party software. Both sides would have at least a partial claim; the game producer made the backbone while the gamer made the specific mod. In the end, it seems very similar to the Microsoft Paint example mentioned earlier. However, cases such as Micro Star v. FormGen Inc., 154 F.3d 1107 (1998) seem to suggest that courts consider user-generated works as derivative content belonging to the copyright owner. This case does not fit the situation of content-created with third party software exactly, so there may be some space for such content to be considered owned by its creator." [2]

 

[1] Odin Law and Media; 7Feb18; "Who owns my mod?" by guest blogger; https://odinlaw.com/who-owns-my-game-mod/

[2] The NYU Journal of Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law; 29Feb16; "The IP Implications of Video Game Mods"; https://blog.jipel.law.nyu.edu/2016/02/the-ip-implications-of-video-game-mods/

Perhaps you should brush up on your EULAs (attached the CK for SSE below cause I had it on hand), rather than googling up generic legal speak about game mods to justify your point (Cause you are talking out of your ass a bit here). a cursory read of the CK EULA shows the following section. 
 

Quote

GAME MODS; OWNERSHIP AND LICENSE TO ZENIMAX
A.    Ownership.  As between You and ZeniMax, You are the owner of Your Game Mods and all intellectual property rights therein, subject to the licenses You grant to ZeniMax in this Agreement.  You will not permit any third party to download, distribute or use Game Mods developed or created by You for any commercial purpose.
 

Under Bethesda's EULA, as I have quoted before, you fully own the works you make, There is no issue of copyright infringement, as you are granted ownership over the work you create. There is some licenses you grant to Zenimax/Bethesda, but that's exclusive to Beth/Zeni and you. Not for any other company. 

There isn't much Legal precedent to go off of with Game Mods, so it's a per court situation. Notably tho, most game companies that try to be modding friendly would are not likely to have anything in their EULA that would turn off mod authors or cause potential headaches down the long run, especially when it comes to importing in assets, as we all know there's some studios that are glad enough to file C&Ds and muscle in legally for even touching their assets (I'm 99% sure any company that tried to claim ownership over the work because it was imported into their game would be signing their death certificate before they even finished their EULA) 

 

CKSSE_EULA.txt

Edited November 21, 2021 by TheBottomhoodofSteel

[steelpanther24]

6 hours ago, TheBottomhoodofSteel said:

Perhaps you should brush up on your EULAs (attached the CK for SSE below cause I had it on hand), rather than googling up generic legal speak about game mods to justify your point (Cause you are talking out of your ass a bit here). a cursory read of the CK EULA shows the following section. 
 

Under Bethesda's EULA, as I have quoted before, you fully own the works you make, There is no issue of copyright infringement, as you are granted ownership over the work you create. There is some licenses you grant to Zenimax/Bethesda, but that's exclusive to Beth/Zeni and you. Not for any other company. 

There isn't much Legal precedent to go off of with Game Mods, so it's a per court situation. Notably tho, most game companies that try to be modding friendly would are not likely to have anything in their EULA that would turn off mod authors or cause potential headaches down the long run, especially when it comes to importing in assets, as we all know there's some studios that are glad enough to file C&Ds and muscle in legally for even touching their assets (I'm 99% sure any company that tried to claim ownership over the work because it was imported into their game would be signing their death certificate before they even finished their EULA) 

 

CKSSE_EULA.txt 25.88 kB · 0 downloads

 

I find it disheartening that civil discourse is in such a state that one party resorts to name calling (troll, talking out of your ass, etc.) rather than stating  "I have more information than you" then state their points along with source citations.   However, I voluntarily entered the fray, so the fault lies with me.   I can only hazard a guess as to why one party resorts to that, with no justifiable provocation, but will not voice it here. 

 

Essentially what I am saying is the EULA can say whatever it wants.    The EULA is for the protection of the company, not the user, as you rightly pointed out, so the one between us and CK is not applicable to Nexus [1].  Secondly, there are examples of where EULAs were ruled nonenforceable due to their language [2][3]   For the purposes of discussion in this case, someone will have to bring Nexus EULA (since changed due to the collections decision) at the time a mod author uploaded to a court to have a decision ruled upon it.    The US and the EU differ on their interpretations, but in general if the EULA is something that is beyond reasonable understanding, then it is nonenforceable [3] [4].   That kind of ruling can, depending on the court, work in Nexus's favor in that the mod author voluntarily uploaded without an enforceable EULA making the decision come down to whose attorney is better at their job.

 

In spite of my familiarity with IP, EULAs and others copyright issues, coming from regular association on these matters with attorneys, I can only offer opinion only, and anyone claiming (without proof) that the matter has been decided is wrong.   Finally, EULA enforcement, IP and ownership would have to be decided by the UK (where Nexus is located), so all of my references are academic and would likely not be considered.

 

[1]US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit; 10Sep10; "VERNOR vs. AUTODESK, INC" https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/09/10/09-35969.pdf

[2] USG Federal Register; 22Feb18; "Section 552.232-39 Unenforceability of Unauthorized Obligations (FAR DEVIATION)." https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/02/22/2018-03350/general-services-administration-acquisition-regulation-unenforceable-commercial-supplier-agreement

(This is the primary source of my information on EULAs, and it is a practice not court precedent.   The US Third Court of Appeals had a case where they ruled the EULA is beyond the understanding of a reasonable person and therefore is nonenforceable. )

[3] Justia US Law on 7th Circuit Court case hearing; 20Jun96; "Procd, Incorporated, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Matthew Zeidenberg and Silken Mountain Web Services, Inc."; https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/86/1447/538242/

[4] Lexis Nexis public access page (not going to use my log in to find the full case file); 27Mar07; "Feldman v. Google, Inc." https://www.lexisnexis.com/community/casebrief/p/casebrief-feldman-v-google-inc

Edited November 21, 2021 by steelpanther24

[TheBottomhoodofSteel]

You wandered into a hella annoying and stressful conversation, so... It's been since August of dealing with people stuck on stupid and acting entitled about something they have no right to feel entitled over. Honestly I'm quite tired of the whole mess. Come in sideways I'm not liable for how I react. 

While you are correct that the EULA would not legally stand. Under current Bethesda EULA, it is noted that you do own your content and Bethesda makes no claim to ownership. Point blank, Despite what anyone tries or wants to say, that stands until challenged. 

As far as Nexus. The situation is different. This is a company changing their terms of services numerous times without making the people they're servicing aware of their changes. 

There is actual legal precedent to this, and there is requirements for a TOS change to be legally binding in a court of law, which is why so many companies make a huge deal when they do revise their terms of service. Nexus up til recently where they did the whole "We changed our TOS" has changed their Terms of service quite a few times without user awareness.  


This covers the situation with Nexus. 
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/safeselling/terms/

[Nuka Cherry]

51 minutes ago, TheBottomhoodofSteel said:

This covers the situation with Nexus. 
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/safeselling/terms/

 

US terms and conditions do not apply to the Nexus website, as it is owned by Black Tree Gaming ltd, a UK registered company. Your agreement with them would be covered by UK consumer law.

[TheBottomhoodofSteel]

2 hours ago, Nuka Cherry said:

 

US terms and conditions do not apply to the Nexus website, as it is owned by Black Tree Gaming ltd, a UK registered company. Your agreement with them would be covered by UK consumer law.

https://www.netlawman.co.uk/ia/making-your-terms-and-conditions-stick

[27X]

On 11/21/2021 at 2:49 PM, Nuka Cherry said:

 

US terms and conditions do not apply to the Nexus website, as it is owned by Black Tree Gaming ltd, a UK registered company. Your agreement with them would be covered by UK consumer law.

 

Nope.

 

Nexus uses US assets and infrastructure for bandwidth, publishing and storage. Additionally, the EU/UK also signed the same EULA statute the US and Japan did. The EULA is in no way shape or form legally binding in any universe.

[Celedhring]

Is there any point where DMCA enters in all this? 

 

[Uncle64]

There is one other thing that all seems to forget that even MS have told about, it is even if you use Pirated programs you will still OWN the things you have made whit it there is no way that Nexus or any other site can own it.

That is simply because you have made it.

[TheBottomhoodofSteel]

13 hours ago, Celedhring said:

Is there any point where DMCA enters in all this? 

 

I don't think it would factor into this. Even then I think I mentioned earlier that someone tried a DMCA, before Nexus tried to backtrack and did the bullshit deletion form, and was subsequently banned for "Filing a false DMCA claim". 

So you could probably try a DMCA, but you'll most deffo end up having to fight it out in court with them, and prepare for them to accuse you of perjury as a method to ruin your name. But I ain't no lawyer, so go consult one on that end. 

I would say you may, if you live in the EU, be able to invoke right to be forgotten, but IDK how the hell that works since I live in 'Murica 
 

[Nuka Cherry]

On 11/23/2021 at 2:31 AM, 27X said:

 

Nope.

 

Nexus uses US assets and infrastructure for bandwidth, publishing and storage. Additionally, the EU/UK also signed the same EULA statute the US and Japan did. The EULA is in no way shape or form legally binding in any universe.

 

I do not disagree with what you said, but what I was referring to was applicable and enforceable consumer law. In the end you have to sue someone for something, somewhere (because that is what a contract serves as - the opening position in a future legal case if you fail to deliver). You can sue black tree gaming, in the UK, under, for example, copyright or some other infringed right. Or you could sue in the US and sue data and bandwidth - how would you enforce extraterriorality for a civil US case - you would still have to seek enforcement via UK courts against sue-able assets in the UK. Blergh, bored at work so not helping this debate.

 

Nexus was wrong in what it did, it wasn't fair. It wasn't illegal.

[DIYDeath]

On 11/18/2021 at 2:40 AM, OH1972 said:

 

Collections are not being paywalled. The one-click functionality is reserved for premium users, which makes sense since they get higher bandwidth, which makes one-click downloads practical to begin with. Non-premium users can still use collections, they just need to download the mods one by one - which given the lower bandwith isn't half bad, since it allows you to take a break and do something else. It's still a massive step up from investing days into a new setup.

 

To quote Polygon: "As a comparison, downloading a list of 50 mods for Valheim took the mod staff 11 minutes as a free user; with a premium account, it took 3 minutes."

 

That is absolutely paywalling collections - and you pointed exactly out why it's okay. I'm not really hating on Nexus and overall view the change as both good for the community and good for them as a corporation. Cheers!

[izzyknows]

2 hours ago, DIYDeath said:

 

That is absolutely paywalling collections - and you pointed exactly out why it's okay. I'm not really hating on Nexus and overall view the change as both good for the community and good for them as a corporation. Cheers!

If you read the Nesxus's latest TOS from a mod authors perspective, you'd be singing a different tune. Basically.. anything you upload belongs to them to use anyway they see fit... "forever".

[thepit]

On 11/27/2021 at 8:57 PM, izzyknows said:

If you read the Nesxus's latest TOS from a mod authors perspective, you'd be singing a different tune. Basically.. anything you upload belongs to them to use anyway they see fit... "forever".

 

That's a bold move. so what happens when people go to other places? Part of what made me start really hating bethesda was when they stopped using the steam workshop. I have not had issues using mods from the steam workshop, they have worked well with almost every game. Hell kenshi has nude mods on the steam workshop, and conjoh left to for some weird pay site that's japanese only. If kenshi had better sex mods i would have ponied up the cash for that hot fox mom race he made.  I mean it would suck to have to change my habits, but at the same time change happens. If they keep fucking around they will piss off the wrong person and that person will make their own lovers lab mod launcher. At the same time part of why i bought those bethesda games was for the modding. Modded oblivion was awesome, unmoded skyrim is meh and only worth a few bucks. If starfield is less mod friendly than FO4 i am not going to get it. 

There is a lot of reckoning going on right now. that whole "artificial scarcity" that the consoles did bit them in the ass with the chip shortages. Combine that with an economy that is turning the screws on people and a piss poor game library and we have a recipe for a new influx of pc gamers. Why should i spend 60 dollars on a meh game, when there are cheaper games that are not only better experiences, but also have community support? 

 

Edited March 29, 2022 by thepit

[Rewrisk]

Interesting reading.

Been wondering for a while what was going on with Nexus?

Can't see that I like what they are doing as a consumer let alone handing over my IP rights in exchange for distribution as a creator.

Only started modding a bit over a year ago.

 

Been playing with computers for years but never found anything compelling enough to really get into it.

Then I tried VR!

Learnt more in the last couple of years than in the 20 previous.

 

I am definitely in the creators corner.

The behavior of Nexus is ridiculous.

There are legitimate needs on both sides but Nexus has been completely unreasonable and made no attempt to reach a cordial agreement that benefits everyone.

Only been using the service for a year and already nearly half the mods I downloaded are no longer available.

They very much appear to be engaged in suicidal behavior?.

[Nuka Cherry]

It is a matter of perspective (and for what it is worth, I side with creators), but there is a "wiki" approach that underpins these moves. In other words, these sites see themselves as a collective resource that you contribute to and when you contribute you lose the right to "de-contribute". Whether they are actually exploiting a passionate user base to gain income... well.. cough cough... but anyway.

 

I am not convinced it will have much effect long term. Several modders have already gone back, because, outside of Nexus it is no different except at a few smaller sites that struggle to gain traction.

 

 

 

 

[NNS10]

On 4/21/2022 at 10:24 AM, Nuka Cherry said:

I am not convinced it will have much effect long term. Several modders have already gone back, because, outside of Nexus it is no different except at a few smaller sites that struggle to gain traction.

 

Compared to other mod hosting sites (including here at LL), the biggest advantage Nexus has over everyone else is they have a robust mod database system along with an API for mod management software, making it not only simple to download and install mods, but most importantly track and update mods.

 

That last point is especially important when games are still updating regularly and you need to keep your mods up-to-date in order to play them.

 

Sims 4 is a good example where that's a problem. There is a large modding community for it here at LL, and there are also a lot of mods on different individual sites and blogs. TS4 does not have the convenience of something like MO2 or Vortex. And with TS4 getting updated regularly, it is a real challenge to keep your modded game in a working state. The task of trying to even figure out what mods need updating is complicated enough, much less the tedious follow-on task of finding and installing them (remember, no nexus but dozens of different websites and blogs).

 

 

P.S. I am in no way justifying Nexus' actions. I'm just pointing out what their value is to the modding scene, which is what alternative mod hosting websites will need to look at if they want to be competitive.

[TheBottomhoodofSteel]

3 hours ago, NNS10 said:

 

Compared to other mod hosting sites (including here at LL), the biggest advantage Nexus has over everyone else is they have a robust mod database system along with an API for mod management software, making it not only simple to download and install mods, but most importantly track and update mods.

 

That last point is especially important when games are still updating regularly and you need to keep your mods up-to-date in order to play them.

 

Sims 4 is a good example where that's a problem. There is a large modding community for it here at LL, and there are also a lot of mods on different individual sites and blogs. TS4 does not have the convenience of something like MO2 or Vortex. And with TS4 getting updated regularly, it is a real challenge to keep your modded game in a working state. The task of trying to even figure out what mods need updating is complicated enough, much less the tedious follow-on task of finding and installing them (remember, no nexus but dozens of different websites and blogs).

 

 

P.S. I am in no way justifying Nexus' actions. I'm just pointing out what their value is to the modding scene, which is what alternative mod hosting websites will need to look at if they want to be competitive.

Sims community still manages to do pretty well being fractured up into smaller sites/blogs, let's not take out the Sims CC finds blogs that have done pretty well with helping make mods visible. Discord has also worked to keep the community mostly together. 

If we're using Sims community as an example... We could analyze MTS & TSR. Both have very limited community trust in them considering the previous actions of their respective ownership (TSR was well known for attacking/hacking/doxxing community members who disagreed with their paid model (before they went free) -- MTS's owner was charged and convicted for I believe having Child Porn back in the 00's). MTS never really bounced back from all its respective drama and it shows. TSR has tried to bounce back, but honestly it looks more like it's people who don't know their past who are giving them a chance, plus they tend to lose out creators anyway to Patreon. 

Neither of these happened overnight, of course, they took time to occur. Nexus is still in that phase where the thing they decided to fuck over authors on has not yet came to full fruition. A lot of the people returning are only returning until there's a viable alternative they want to use. I've noted it before that it's been a trend to move off Nexus as it is long before Nexus decided to be shitheads to authors. The convenience of uploading to Discord, the chance for better earnings off Patreon and just general distaste for the way the author experience is on Nexus has been a factor in that. Oft times Visibility isn't hard to come by if you know what you're doing and you work with people right. 

 

But back into the BT3 conversation part.. I see no desire to return to Nexus. Considering my personal experiences with the community on Nexus and the fact I feel free-er than I ever did feel tying myself to Nexus just makes me feel like my decision is worth it. Fusion Girl has a home and is still highly visible. BT3 is well known enough and honestly I never cared for much else from this community other than being left to enjoy making my stuff. 

 

 

 

[Arieslia]

On 8/7/2021 at 4:01 PM, TheBottomhoodofSteel said:

I'm Not gonna lie, I don't really care about user perspective on Collections/modpacks. OFC it's convenient and easier for you, that's how it's designed and what they're using to get you to buy into it. Note how you have to have Premium to get that one click experience... End of the day, they decided Author Agency in their own works doesn't matter cause they only see the money they could make selling users a feature and that's not right. You don't fuck over the people who built you up.

Any reasonable user with common sense and respect for the work authors do should want authors to WANT to participate in this system (Which yes, does mean some authors will not want to participate and you should respect that too) , rather than feeling like they're being FORCED to participate in this system.

As I said before, If giving authors an option to opt out of the system would kill your system/feature/etc , maybe... Just MAYBE the system isn't good and you should invest in better systems and features that mod authors would actually want to participate in.

Nexus doesn't and hasn't done that. I've watched numerous times our demands and asking for improvements and fixes to features just get treated as a low priority while they work on the user end more or give priority to the user experience. Uploading to Nexus is a whole ass daunting task as it is, the upload page feels like a damn tax form and there's a lot of times where things will break or act up. They have spent their time basically treating us like we don't matter and I can see why this latest change has authors basically fed up with Nexus. The DP pays peanuts and you have to wait 3 months to get what you earned anyway and the upload system is a nightmare. It's easier to go on Discord/Patreon/Twitter/LL and upload, so why bother with Nexus other than visibility? 

Ultimately Nexus has made their bed, and are layin in it... Had they actually tried to do better about actually being author friendly and making authors happy, I'm sure things would have went differently, but their behavior up to now is what is causing this mess now. 

they definitely could have done better, such as making it opt-in and it's a one-time question: if you say no, then you're exempt from collections and the archive system, if you say yes you agree to collections and the archive system. that way both people who don't like it can opt out and those who like the idea can use it. as an addition, if you chose you could later send a message to support that tells them - not asks, tells - to change your decision. and that's just a spitballed idea off the top of the head of someone who knows very little of this shit.

 

EDIT: just for further context, you and other mod authors were completely in the right for doing this, especially with the way Nexus acted with this. Nexus was completely in the wrong here, and i would abandon the platform if it weren't for the fact that half my preferred mods cannot be found elsewhere and the other half getting them would require an absurd level of jumping through hoops to get them anywhere else.

Edited August 5, 2022 by Arieslia
further clarification of my stance.