The Last Thing We Need is Developers Policing Mods

[Naldan]

If it wasn't on the Steam Workshop or any dev's own site, I'd agree with this article. I'd then also agree with anyone that mentions copyright infringement for example. I doubt that (the money-question aside) the devs would be held responsible if, say, a team would make a LotR total conversion mod for TES III: Morrowind. It would be a stupid overreaction with no legal basis to try and shut them down.

...

I would disagree with this article if this mod was actually really racist and be hosted on Steam Workshop. What was it? Were racist slurs the description? What about other mods/skin colours? So in conclusion, this mod is nothing more special than a mod that makes everyone a train or a pit bull. And it would be an overreaction also.

...


This is a clusterfuck. If it was because of the comments, then why don't just remove the comments? Gee, will they delete their own forums if I'd go there and shout racist slurs? So, I don't buy their move to blame the comments for the deletion of the entire mod.


With this, they actually support the notion that devs are responsible for mods. What a fucking dick move. Way to backstab your colleagues in potential court cases. Glad I didn't buy this very likely DLC trap anyway, even though I love Paradox' grand strategy games.

 

[Pinky's Brain]

At the point that "white people only" mods are now vital to the community

As vital as alternative sexuality mods, or say a female only mod. If only current year ideologies are allowed to be expressed, in modding or otherwise, something important is lost in my opinion.

Of course devs have no obligation to provide a platform for free speech, but I still think it's desirable. People who believe the cost of allowing free speech are net negative would disagree with me of course ... I'm glad they lost this one, may they continue losing.

 

[Devieus]

Why does that developer have control of the people's mods anyway?. I thought that mods were not policed, hence all the variety. Is this an exception with the mentioned developer?

If a mod brings them any legal problems (like another company threatening with legal action), then they should be able to police them in the store. If you can get sued for it, sooner or later you will be.

Mods fall outside of the game's legal scope, the developer of the game is not at fault, only the developer of the mod; it is they who should be notified and gone after, not the game's developer.

In fact, Valve is at a greater risk for hosting these mods than Paradox is for making the game.

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

At the point that "white people only" mods are now vital to the community

As vital as alternative sexuality mods, or say a female only mod. If only current year ideologies are allowed to be expressed, in modding or otherwise, something important is lost in my opinion.

Of course devs have no obligation to provide a platform for free speech, but I still think it's desirable. People who believe the cost of allowing free speech are net negative would disagree with me of course ... I'm glad they lost this one, may they continue losing.

By all means explain what would actually be lost if we don't get a 'white people only' mod, with some real detail. In what way will the world be worse for lacking it?

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

If you don't get the choice to be racist or not, then not being racist has no moral value.

And why should that matter?

I mean it's nowhere close to being the case that people don't get to choose to be racist or not, but if somehow the ability was removed, then so what? Problem solved, who cares if not being racist suddenly doesn't have any special 'value' because it's what everyone does? Sounds like a gain with no apparent losses.

 

[wulf3n]

If you don't get the choice to be racist or not, then not being racist has no moral value.

And why should that matter?

I mean it's nowhere close to being the case that people don't get to choose to be racist or not, but if somehow the ability was removed, then so what? Problem solved, who cares if not being racist suddenly doesn't have any special 'value' because it's what everyone does? Sounds like a gain with no apparent losses.

My guess is they were being facetious.

But it does raise an interesting point. Simply removing the ability to express racism doesn't actually address it's existence.

Thus making it likely that expressions of racism will take on new and bizarre methods

 

[Satinavian]

By all means explain what would actually be lost if we don't get a 'white people only' mod, with some real detail. In what way will the world be worse for lacking it?

I don't want such a mod.

But i don't want companies policing mods. That will lead to :
- Fewer Mods (lesser variation)
- Worse visibility of existing mods (as modding sites will try to be out of reach of companies)
- A perceived responsibility to police mods (which might get developers into trouble and will dissuade some to include mod- suppurt for their games and in other cases make games more expensive to pay for the mod policing)
- Fewer total conversions
- US-American standards of morality imposed my not-at-all american gaming life even more than already. It is already bad enough that developers listen to american moral guardians more than to those of any other nationality

So ... i don't care if the mod or modder was racist or not or if the mod was crappy. I simply don't want mod-policing. At all.

 

[CaitSeith]

Why does that developer have control of the people's mods anyway?. I thought that mods were not policed, hence all the variety. Is this an exception with the mentioned developer?

If a mod brings them any legal problems (like another company threatening with legal action), then they should be able to police them in the store. If you can get sued for it, sooner or later you will be.

Mods fall outside of the game's legal scope, the developer of the game is not at fault, only the developer of the mod; it is they who should be notified and gone after, not the game's developer.

In fact, Valve is at a greater risk for hosting these mods than Paradox is for making the game.

If there is a loop hole, some will use it. Not every developer has the same legal resources as Valve to defend itself from opportunists.

 

[Pinky's Brain]

By all means explain what would actually be lost if we don't get a 'white people only' mod, with some real detail. In what way will the world be worse for lacking it?

In general by perpetuating only current year ideologies you put them on a possibly undeserved pedestal.

You might think melting pot idealism is simply a convenient myth to perpetuate in white society so we share our privilege and to keep the nazis suppressed but the ideology will have real world consequences beyond our society, where money can almost always pave over the cracks. For instance, time and time again it's part of an ideological struggle in international coalitions in peace keeping missions ... often wasted effort as more "primitive" solutions win out regardless. Putting blinders on and pushing for unattainable ideals can do more harm than good.

Truth is for math, everything else should be open to discussion. Including the potential value of ethnically homogeneous societies, white or otherwise. The more venues for such discussions the merrier.

 

[MercurySteam]

Best case scenario is that they start openly supporting mods from the get go like with XCOM 2. Otherwise they should just leave it to the community, and if possible try not to hamper their ability to mod the game. If they do wish to try and police mods then they're just creating more work for themselves.

 

[Devieus]

Why does that developer have control of the people's mods anyway?. I thought that mods were not policed, hence all the variety. Is this an exception with the mentioned developer?

If a mod brings them any legal problems (like another company threatening with legal action), then they should be able to police them in the store. If you can get sued for it, sooner or later you will be.

Mods fall outside of the game's legal scope, the developer of the game is not at fault, only the developer of the mod; it is they who should be notified and gone after, not the game's developer.

In fact, Valve is at a greater risk for hosting these mods than Paradox is for making the game.

If there is a loop hole, some will use it. Not every developer has the same legal resources as Valve to defend itself from opportunists.

No one would sue Paradox for this, they don't need legal resources. There wouldn't be a case, it'd be thrown out the second it got in. Mods simply aren't their responsibility.

 

[Buttking]

By all means explain what would actually be lost if we don't get a 'white people only' mod, with some real detail. In what way will the world be worse for lacking it?

In general by perpetuating only current year ideologies you put them on a possibly undeserved pedestal.

You might think melting pot idealism is simply a convenient myth to perpetuate in white society so we share our privilege and to keep the nazis suppressed but the ideology will have real world consequences beyond our society, where money can almost always pave over the cracks. For instance, time and time again it's part of an ideological struggle in international coalitions in peace keeping missions ... often wasted effort as more "primitive" solutions win out regardless. Putting blinders on and pushing for unattainable ideals can do more harm than good.

Truth is for math, everything else should be open to discussion. Including the potential value of ethnically homogeneous societies, white or otherwise. The more venues for such discussions the merrier.

Slavs aren't white

 

[Buttking]

Honestly, with all the furor regarding censorship and "censorship" these days, I can't help but feel there needs to be some kind of third option between "remove offensive content, weakening free speech and giving ammo to white fascists" and "do nothing, allowing the taint to spread unchecked."

Personally, I'd make it so instead of banning posts on forums, uploads to mod sites, etc., moderators could "poo on" them instead. The content would stay up, unaltered, but with a clearly displayed message showing the disapproval of the site owners, and the page/section showing that content would permanently be "defaced" in some way, for example adding a fecal texture to the background of the post.

Just a dumb idea, I guess.

 

[Amir Kondori]

I'm pretty sure the problem wasn't the mod, it was the written content in the description, which used some racist language. The mod and many like it are still up on the Steam Workshop. I completely support the developer and Valve taking down anything overtly racist from their platform.

 

[Buttking]

Honestly, with all the furor regarding censorship and "censorship" these days, I can't help but feel there needs to be some kind of third option between "remove offensive content, weakening free speech and giving ammo to white fascists" and "do nothing, allowing the taint to spread unchecked."

Personally, I'd make it so instead of banning posts on forums, uploads to mod sites, etc., moderators could "poo on" them instead. The content would stay up, unaltered, but with a clearly displayed message showing the disapproval of the site owners, and the page/section showing that content would permanently be "defaced" in some way, for example adding a fecal texture to the background of the post.

Just a dumb idea, I guess.

People need blood when they're offended. Someone must be fired, deprived of sales, chastised, HURT, to make the offended feel better. This is the reason so much injustice is done in the name of justice.

The fecal idea is fine and good until its YOUR perfectly good idea covered in shit and mocked by the smug ignorant. If you put it out there in all earnest and people treat an idea you think is valid as feces then you may have issues.

Is putting mocking commentary or a sign saying "this statement is wrong, lets mock this ignorant asshole" what we should be doing? It isn't removing the idea but it is casting it as disparaged and wrong. That's great when its ideas we happen to disagree with. That's horribly insensitive if its something like "I think the male suicide rate is indicative of oppressive circumstances too." Someone who sees that as trying to change the subject from female oppression may get that post fecalized and mocked. How about the person that posted it who wanted to express sentiment for their cousin who just committed suicide? They'd (rightfully) feel pissed off and slighted that their viewpoint was fecalized. How about when people misunderstand a position and thus falsely categorize it? Does it deserve to be fecalized because someone can't be bothered to read it properly?
Disparagement MAY be better than outright censorship, since at least the idea is exposed. It depends on how much creedence the fecalization is given. If it causes people to not ever read the post and just mock it then its about as bad as censorship since ti leads to the idea being more difficult to access. (By censorship, in this case, I mean the general term for oppressing or suppressing an idea, not the first amendment expression definition)

This is difficult since one person's truth may be another person's offensive lies.

Yes, how insensitive would we be if we dared to bestow any mockery upon such brilliant ideals as "ur a fagit, lol"?

 

[Pinky's Brain]

Slavs aren't white

The value of massive Eastern European migration to Western Europe should also be open to discussion, high employment rate at least.

Personally, I'd make it so instead of banning posts on forums, uploads to mod sites, etc., moderators could "poo on" them instead. The content would stay up, unaltered, but with a clearly displayed message showing the disapproval of the site owners, and the page/section showing that content would permanently be "defaced" in some way, for example adding a fecal texture to the background of the post.

So ad hominem attacks which can't be replied to in kind (if you don't want to get banned). I doubt it would help, it just looks petty. Makes it look like you have no real counter argument, as likely a badge of honor as an insult in fact. You can't shame people with an assumed identity on the internet into silence, only with doxing can you cow people into silence without any real argument.

Real life enforces conformity to the status quo more readily than the internet. Although even there people can still anonymously tick off a box at the ballot box ...