Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Somerandomguy16123]

Hello to all Forum users, due to recent event in light of community has came devilish practice of creation "crash codes" or other types of malicious codes made in order to hinder or deny end user ability to enjoy their modded experience in the ways they so choose to have. As such I come with proposal of bringing full 0 tolerance policy as to cut this not worthy of modder behaviour.

Currently I suggest:
A full and total ban of mod authors who have even once proven to create or distribute any type of malicious code aimed directly at end user, regardless if this approach is targetted to specific users or whole wide scene of modded players. By definition any code that aims to hinder or unallow users of Starsector to enjoy their modded gameplay is to be considered malicious, with no regard as to reason why it came to being or its purpose. Alongside it just in case that some bad actors in modded community would try to bypass this rule just because of their own believes, I suggest that any external filtering code(Additional file unavailable on forums BUT required to make the mod function) to be as well accounted for as creation and distribution of malicious code by forcing Forum users to access external sites in order to be able to fully enjoy their gameplay in ways that they see fit.

This whole suggestion was done in response to PresidentMattDamon's approach which is shameful and deserving of his presence as whole to be erased, since what he has done is perversion of the ideas of modding.

[Princess_of_Evil]

I'm honestly surprised it isn't already an official rule, although it definitely seems to be an unofficial one; you would be slapped off Curse in nanoseconds for any malware in your mods (unless you can prove your account was hacked).

Although i don't really like this wording. Ruthless Sector and Realistic Combat fall under it, for example.

[Swagnemite9090]

Posting here in support of this suggestion. Unless you blanket ban any sort of behaviour like those you’ll have people bending rules e.g crashcode.

[jujuteux]

Let's at least allow the modders to explain themselves, and allow it if it's directly mentioned in the modpage
crashcode can be used to prevent fundamentally uncompatible mods from being played knowing it'd have a certain moment where it'd corrupt saves on next load because of how they fundamentally work together

a blanket, no context ban when there may be legitimate, technical reasons for it is a terrible idea

(also i'm making a mod that will have a (fake) worm and thus is technically a malware if your definition is very, very loose, and since you talk about no-context bans, even barely-fitting definitions becomes applicable)

[Somerandomguy16123]

Of course I understand concerns, this is but a suggestion, and any addition from people commenting to this post should atleast be noticed by moderators and admins of forums while they are creating rule changes.

[SCC]

I'm honestly surprised it isn't already an official rule, although it definitely seems to be an unofficial one; you would be slapped off Curse in nanoseconds for any malware in your mods (unless you can prove your account was hacked).

Technically speaking, it is. The forum rules prohibit illegal activities, and malware is a crime. It appears some people think it's a funny prank, though.

[Alexios7333]

I don't think the after is a problem. The problem is prevention which is obviously much harder. Realistically maybe we can ask volunteers to test mods or comb the code for weird stuff. What we largely need and I think what Alex is considering are preventative measures. maybe we just need an ego watch list behind the scenes where when people start acting funny we start watching their mods and asking for early access for testing before they can be released.

The problem is not punishment. Alex acted swiftly and the precedent is likely already set. The problem is how to prevent it which is far easier said than done. While there are diehard loyals who will accept these situations obviously there are many people who will be put off by this. Even a single bad modder can do a lot of damage to a space even if the damage done by the thing in question is not serious. Like MattDamon could have done far worse which is the problem.

This situation sucks but maybe we just need to have titled for reputable modders in the community and reputable mods. That way once mods have earned trust they can be designated as such or so on. As a whole the problem is not punishment it is prevention.

[Somerandomguy16123]

I'm honestly surprised it isn't already an official rule, although it definitely seems to be an unofficial one; you would be slapped off Curse in nanoseconds for any malware in your mods (unless you can prove your account was hacked).

Technically speaking, it is. The forum rules prohibit illegal activities, and malware is a crime. It appears some people think it's a funny prank, though.

Yet we have here PresidentMattDamon, and possibly Drang. Modders should have no ability in dictating how and what the end user's gameplay should be. Especially in case of PMD who's approach was disgusting at that. His actions should be used be seen as firm warning about you know what.

[Somerandomguy16123]

I don't think the after is a problem. The problem is prevention which is obviously much harder. Realistically maybe we can ask volunteers to test mods or comb the code for weird stuff. What we largely need and I think what Alex is considering are preventative measures. maybe we just need an ego watch list behind the scenes where when people start acting funny we start watching their mods and asking for early access for testing before they can be released.

The problem is not punishment. Alex acted swiftly and the precedent is likely already set. The problem is how to prevent it which is far easier said than done. While there are diehard loyals who will accept these situations obviously there are many people who will be put off by this. Even a single bad modder can do a lot of damage to a space even if the damage done by the thing in question is not serious. Like MattDamon could have done far worse which is the problem.

This situation sucks but maybe we just need to have titled for reputable modders in the community and reputable mods. That way once mods have earned trust they can be designated as such or so on. As a whole the problem is not punishment it is prevention.

I could very much agree with this. Idea of Volunteers checking it would be good.

[Farya]

Let's at least allow the modders to explain themselves, and allow it if it's directly mentioned in the modpage
crashcode can be used to prevent fundamentally uncompatible mods from being played knowing it'd have a certain moment where it'd corrupt saves on next load because of how they fundamentally work together

a blanket, no context ban when there may be legitimate, technical reasons for it is a terrible idea

(also i'm making a mod that will have a (fake) worm and thus is technically a malware if your definition is very, very loose, and since you talk about no-context bans, even barely-fitting definitions becomes applicable)

There is no legitimate reason for crashcode ever. If you have a genuine mod incompatibility with other's works - just state it clearly for users. We already have a plenty of megamods that naturally don't work together.

[nimtiz22]

yeah like in fallout or edlerscolls modding if a mod doesnt work with you mod you list it as being incompatible no weird code needed

[DeCell]

I stand before this, i dont want some modder to effect how i play my game on my computer on my freetime that i could spend on other things.

[Lord_Matheas]

Let's at least allow the modders to explain themselves, and allow it if it's directly mentioned in the modpage
crashcode can be used to prevent fundamentally uncompatible mods from being played knowing it'd have a certain moment where it'd corrupt saves on next load because of how they fundamentally work together

a blanket, no context ban when there may be legitimate, technical reasons for it is a terrible idea

(also i'm making a mod that will have a (fake) worm and thus is technically a malware if your definition is very, very loose, and since you talk about no-context bans, even barely-fitting definitions becomes applicable)

i disagree, there is a big difrence between two mods fundimentally being incompatable due to trying to override the same files and not accounting for the others existance, and deliberate crashcode/malware made to harm users that used a mod combination one of the authors didnt aprove of purely due to whatever personal opinion they hold and wish to enforce on others.

in most cases it should be possible to tell the two appart, of course keeping in mind there will be those that wanna play smart and try to mask the former as the latter

[IntoCombat]

Although i don't really like this wording. Ruthless Sector and Realistic Combat fall under it, for example.

I think an exception should be considered for mods like those whose entire purpose is to change major aspects of the game entirely; which will inevitably change how other mods work as a consequence. I think it should be limited to actual malicious code, such as crash code, ruining saves, or sneaking in code to nerf ships belonging to specific mods the modder dislikes (if anyone remembers the Tahlan incident; then that’s the first incident where code like that came to light)

[nimtiz22]

Although i don't really like this wording. Ruthless Sector and Realistic Combat fall under it, for example.

I think an exception should be considered for mods like those whose entire purpose is to change major aspects of the game entirely; which will inevitably change how other mods work as a consequence. I think it should be limited to actual malicious code, such as crash code, ruining saves, or sneaking in code to nerf ships belonging to specific mods the modder dislikes (if anyone remembers the Tahlan incident; then that’s the first incident where code like that came to light)

ruthless and realistic tell the player on the mod page that they made changes. the issues is when its done in a way that is hidden