Better resources check

[GabyTM]

Perhaps check the resources better before accepting them, for example Adi100 got suspended after a few months after he posted a bedwars setup for using Hypixel maps (he had the same maps since begin).

Also, if moderators find a premium jar left inside a setup by accident and the resource hasn't been approved yet, can they notify the author about that instead of suspending the user immediately?

 

[Justis]

Resource authors should not be handling premium jars if they cannot accept the responsibility of ensuring that they’re not leaking them when they upload. MCM only checks the first version, we don’t check any of those following. So if you can’t even ensure that the one that’s checked isn’t violating anyone’s rights, what faith can we have that you’ll ensure that for all of your resource’s following updates?

It’s the author’s responsibility to ensure that they aren’t publishing unowned content and violating someone’s rights, not MCM’s, and we will not be taking that away and putting it upon ourselves. Which is what your suggestion is suggesting.
Resource authors need to be ensuring that they’re taking it seriously, when they check their uploads for unowned content. They are, after all, the ones who put it in there, and nobody else. They fully know, or they should, the content of their resources. We do not.

In a marketplace, carelessly leaking someone else’s product is the biggest mistake you could possibly make. Those whose irresponsibility is unable to be corrected should not be uploading resources here. 20 warning points and a temporary suspension is a slap on the wrist.

 

[GabyTM]

Resource authors should not be handling premium jars if they cannot accept the responsibility of ensuring that they’re not leaking them when they upload. MCM only checks the first version, we don’t check any of those following. So if you can’t even ensure that the one that’s checked isn’t violating anyone’s rights, what faith can we have that you’ll ensure that for all of your resource’s following updates?

It’s the author’s responsibility to ensure that they aren’t publishing unowned content and violating someone’s rights, not MCM’s, and we will not be taking that away and putting it upon ourselves. Which is what your suggestion is suggesting.
Resource authors need to be ensuring that they’re taking it seriously, when they check their uploads for unowned content. They are, after all, the ones who put it in there, and nobody else. They fully know, or they should, the content of their resources. We do not.

In a marketplace, carelessly leaking someone else’s product is the biggest mistake you could possibly make. Those whose irresponsibility is unable to be corrected should not be uploading resources here. 20 warning points and a temporary suspension is a slap on the wrist.

Fair enough.

 

[Mick]

Resource authors should not be handling premium jars if they cannot accept the responsibility of ensuring that they’re not leaking them when they upload. MCM only checks the first version, we don’t check any of those following. So if you can’t even ensure that the one that’s checked isn’t violating anyone’s rights, what faith can we have that you’ll ensure that for all of your resource’s following updates?

It’s the author’s responsibility to ensure that they aren’t publishing unowned content and violating someone’s rights, not MCM’s, and we will not be taking that away and putting it upon ourselves. Which is what your suggestion is suggesting.
Resource authors need to be ensuring that they’re taking it seriously, when they check their uploads for unowned content. They are, after all, the ones who put it in there, and nobody else. They fully know, or they should, the content of their resources. We do not.

In a marketplace, carelessly leaking someone else’s product is the biggest mistake you could possibly make. Those whose irresponsibility is unable to be corrected should not be uploading resources here. 20 warning points and a temporary suspension is a slap on the wrist.

Denied, thanks for the suggestion