Historically, patches were not "tolerated", by Nexus. Such a statement seems especially odd given them leaning into the ToS so hard in the recent controversy.
I wouldn't normally share material from there, but this is presented as an official statement from a site Admin, and it seems necessary to avoid confusion over what has actually been said. Frankly, I find the statements here contradictory. There has been no change to Nexus ToS, that is clear, yet this post implies Nexus does not actually enforce the ToS as written. It was originally posted in the General Mod Author Discussion forum on Nexus. So, I believe this is the post that is getting everyone exercised. There needs to be more to the conversation than nexus bad or nexus good if we want to (hopefully) fix things. I can also understand the perspective of modders since this does mean that people aren't going to their pages and that they now have less control over files. The concept of collections is pretty useful, it allows inexperienced users to instantly hop into modding without having to learn shit tons of stuff beforehand it would be a good way to bring more people into modding. My main Idea was that both sides make good points you with your belief of the creator rights and nexus with their belief in user functionality. I want to focus more on both sides coming to an agreement since that was the main point of my original comment.
I do not want to go into this as it is similar to most opinion-focused arguments it will only go circular since it's based on opinion rather than fact. This is about author's consent, something Wrye recognised as essential for the health of the modding community.Īgain, I am not going into this as that is not what I am trying to bring. It's worth noting that when Wrye published his original essay Nexus was one among a multitude of hosting options, probably already the largest but hardly dominant. The trust is now gone, so now mod authors are looking for competitors to Nexus mods so that Nexus no longer has a monopoly. Then Robin went and did this for what are primarily financial reasons. Nexus has for a long time been a good steward of author's work and an author's write to choose - central to Wrye's original thesis. This is the reason it ultimately overtook the other modding sites - it made a point of coming down on the side of authors without being overly heavy handed and built up trust over a decade and a half. In fact, the only thing he insisted all authors should (not must) adopt was a provision allowing their work to be re-uploaded to other sites to prevent it being lost should one host go down. Whilst Wrye leaned towards what he called a "Cathedral" form of modding he was emphatic that no author should ever be forced or coerced into adopted open permissions. Wrye's essay is oft-cited but sadly rarely read. I think you mean "ultimately a Cathedral vs Parlour debate", but in any case you're wrong.
0 kommentar(er)
