external download links in resources to Craftbukkit and Spigot

[samyratchet]

Hello,

I want to suggest a change to the resource rule to allow Spigot or CraftBukkit download links,
I think it would help people like me to have that ability so we don't need to repeat uploading updates on multiple platforms or dividing the download counter that makes resources less attractive.

Let me now what you think


greetings SamyRatchet

 

[Justis]

http://blog.mediafire.com/2010/08/update-an-existing-url-with-a-new-file/

Even if Mediafire didn’t allow for files to be updated/modified after being uploaded, MC-Market cannot depend on them to always maintain that policy. They’re their own company, completely uncontrolled by us. If they suddenly changed policies or granted new abilities that we couldn’t allow, all resources with external links would need to be taken down. Depending on how many people decided to use external links instead of MCM uploads at that point in time, that could have a major impact on our entire community.

However, to address this point:


That is not the main problem. The issue is that we need to have a record of the files, so that we can check them in case a report is made. Not just malware reports, but also distributing unowned content reports, and also scam reports, where buyers claim the product was not as described.
If the file gets deleted, then we have no record.

The only way to resolve that is to have the file hosted by us.

The same applies for Spigot/Bukkit. They’re their own entities with their own policies for their files which we have absolutely no control over. We cannot demand information/records from them when we need it, and they’re under no obligation to assist us when we need access to a particular file that they may or may not still have on their platform.
I’m sure nobody can foresee it at the moment, but if we allow for these external links, and one of those sites goes down, all of our resources which point to those websites will suddenly cease to function and will need to be taken down. Again, depending on how many people use external links instead of uploads at that point in time, it could have a major impact on our entire community.

The files must be hosted by us.
We are the only website that we have control over, and we are the only website we should be depending on to provide our services.

 

[samyratchet]

The same applies for Spigot/Bukkit. They’re their own entities with their own policies for their files which we have absolutely no control over. We cannot demand information/records from them when we need it, and they’re under no obligation to assist us when we need access to a particular file that they may or may not still have on their platform.
I’m sure nobody can foresee it at the moment, but if we allow for these external links, and one of those sites goes down, all of our resources which point to those websites will suddenly cease to function and will need to be taken down. Again, depending on how many people use external links instead of uploads at that point in time, it could have a major impact on our entire community.

The files must be hosted by us.
We are the only website that we have control over, and we are the only website we should be depending on to provide our services.

Maybe you are right on that matter, i didn't look into it as administrator or staff perspective if those things would happen it would definitely harm the community.

Maybe if i change my suggestion a little bit then with your perspective in mind, that if we upload resources but really want to have external urls, you only are allowed from accepted websites approved by MC-Market team and that there is a warning on your resources page to people that is using your resource. (example: Note: this plugin is being provided with an external download link itc)

This is just a suggestion, so what do you think about it

 

[Justis]

Maybe you are right on that matter, i didn't look into it as administrator or staff perspective if those things would happen it would definitely harm the community.

Maybe if i change my suggestion a little bit then with your perspective in mind, that if we upload resources but really want to have external urls, you only are allowed from accepted websites approved by MC-Market team and that there is a warning on your resources page to people that is using your resource. (example: Note: this plugin is being provided with an external download link itc)

This is just a suggestion, so what do you think about it

Any feature MC-Market offers is a feature MC-Market endorses and encourages.
It would be absurd for us to offer a feature which erases protection for both our buyers and our sellers.

One of the few things that makes MCM special compared to other resource focused sites is our dedication to member protection. Where other platforms may remove the report button from areas of their site to limit moderation needs, we encourage it. Where other platforms may delete threads reporting scams and require reports be made in private where the staff decision can be kept quiet and without scrutiny, we keep them open to the public. Where other sites hide their banned members list to keep up appearances, we allow the community to see who has been banned, why, and enable them to protect themselves against those people.

Within reports of unowned content redistribution.
Within reports of malware redistribution.
Within reports of no product delivery, products not being as described, or other scam reports, we do not cut corners in terms of moderation. We do absolutely everything in our power to determine who is at fault, why, and ensure that compensation is provided or that they are appropriately punished for their violations of our users rights.

The issue of file hosts going down is indeed a real threat, and we take it seriously in the consideration of depending on third party services. However, even if they were never at risk of going down, depending on them for our resources is still out of the question.

We need reliable records in order to handle any report on a resource, be it malware, unowned content, content not being as described, etc. The files of a third party service are not that. So to phrase it another way, even if the records for every resource were always available on these services, they would be useless to us. Unlike records controlled by us, they could not properly serve as conclusive evidence.

By adding a third party hosting feature for resources, we would be knowingly cutting off our ability to protect the authors and the buyers/downloaders of those resources; and for what? The convenience of the resource author not needing to upload twice and having a more attractive download count on the third party service?

This isn’t something MC-Market can endorse and encourage.

Remember that it’s not just that one resource author who’s at risk if a malicious user goes unpunished, it’s our entire community that must continue to be subjected to their presence on our site, because that resource author elected to erase our ability to catch them and ban their account.

Those alone, are the reasons for my decision. Reports apply even to free resources, however, some additional points you may be interested in as a seller:

You’d forego your ability to post resource updates.
You’d forego your ability to restrict download access.
You’d forego your ability to add/edit/remove download licenses.
You’d forego your ability to use our subscription model for resources.
You’d forego your ability to charge a price higher than the third party service allows.
You’d forego your buyer tracking page, which contains all of the download evidence you’d forward to PayPal to fight chargebacks and scam reports on MCM, regardless of whether you’re the accused or the accuser.
You’d forego your ability to utilize our resource string injection feature, once implemented, and by extension, every bit of leak protection that you’d have available to you, to track leakers and get them banned from our website, not just so that they can’t continue to leak your product, but so that they can’t continue to leak the products of the rest of our community.

It doesn’t make sense for MCM to offer dependencies on services that we are actively striving to provide a better service than.

 

[samyratchet]

Any feature MC-Market offers is a feature MC-Market endorses and encourages.
It would be absurd for us to offer a feature which erases protection for both our buyers and our sellers.

One of the few things that makes MCM special compared to other resource focused sites is our dedication to member protection. Where other platforms may remove the report button from areas of their site to limit moderation needs, we encourage it. Where other platforms may delete threads reporting scams and require reports be made in private where the staff decision can be kept quiet and without scrutiny, we keep them open to the public. Where other sites hide their banned members list to keep up appearances, we allow the community to see who has been banned, why, and enable them to protect themselves against those people.

Within reports of unowned content redistribution.
Within reports of malware redistribution.
Within reports of no product delivery, products not being as described, or other scam reports, we do not cut corners in terms of moderation. We do absolutely everything in our power to determine who is at fault, why, and ensure that compensation is provided or that they are appropriately punished for their violations of our users rights.

The issue of file hosts going down is indeed a real threat, and we take it seriously in the consideration of depending on third party services. However, even if they were never at risk of going down, depending on them for our resources is still out of the question.

We need reliable records in order to handle any report on a resource, be it malware, unowned content, content not being as described, etc. The files of a third party service are not that. So to phrase it another way, even if the records for every resource were always available on these services, they would be useless to us. Unlike records controlled by us, they could not properly serve as conclusive evidence.

By adding a third party hosting feature for resources, we would be knowingly cutting off our ability to protect the authors and the buyers/downloaders of those resources; and for what? The convenience of the resource author not needing to upload twice and having a more attractive download count on the third party service?

This isn’t something MC-Market can endorse and encourage.

Remember that it’s not just that one resource author who’s at risk if a malicious user goes unpunished, it’s our entire community that must continue to be subjected to their presence on our site, because that resource author elected to erase our ability to catch them and ban their account.

Those alone, are the reasons for my decision. Reports apply even to free resources, however, some additional points you may be interested in as a seller:

You’d forego your ability to post resource updates.
You’d forego your ability to use our restrictive download access.
You’d forego your ability to add/edit/remove download licenses.
You’d forego your ability to use our subscription model for resources.
You’d forego your ability to charge a price higher than the third party service allows.
You’d forego your buyer tracking page, which contains all of the download evidence you’d forward to PayPal to fight chargebacks and scam reports on MCM, regardless of whether you’re the accused or the accuser.
You’d forego your ability to utilize our resource string injection feature, once implemented, and by extension, every bit of leak protection that you’d have available to you, to track leakers and get them banned from our website, not just so that they can’t continue to leak your product, but so that they can’t continue to leak the products of the rest of our community.

It doesn’t make sense for MCM to offer dependencies on services that we are actively striving to provide a better service than.

Understand that, providing protection to the community is more important then this feature.

 

[Mick]

Any feature MC-Market offers is a feature MC-Market endorses and encourages.
It would be absurd for us to offer a feature which erases protection for both our buyers and our sellers.

One of the few things that makes MCM special compared to other resource focused sites is our dedication to member protection. Where other platforms may remove the report button from areas of their site to limit moderation needs, we encourage it. Where other platforms may delete threads reporting scams and require reports be made in private where the staff decision can be kept quiet and without scrutiny, we keep them open to the public. Where other sites hide their banned members list to keep up appearances, we allow the community to see who has been banned, why, and enable them to protect themselves against those people.

Within reports of unowned content redistribution.
Within reports of malware redistribution.
Within reports of no product delivery, products not being as described, or other scam reports, we do not cut corners in terms of moderation. We do absolutely everything in our power to determine who is at fault, why, and ensure that compensation is provided or that they are appropriately punished for their violations of our users rights.

The issue of file hosts going down is indeed a real threat, and we take it seriously in the consideration of depending on third party services. However, even if they were never at risk of going down, depending on them for our resources is still out of the question.

We need reliable records in order to handle any report on a resource, be it malware, unowned content, content not being as described, etc. The files of a third party service are not that. So to phrase it another way, even if the records for every resource were always available on these services, they would be useless to us. Unlike records controlled by us, they could not properly serve as conclusive evidence.

By adding a third party hosting feature for resources, we would be knowingly cutting off our ability to protect the authors and the buyers/downloaders of those resources; and for what? The convenience of the resource author not needing to upload twice and having a more attractive download count on the third party service?

This isn’t something MC-Market can endorse and encourage.

Remember that it’s not just that one resource author who’s at risk if a malicious user goes unpunished, it’s our entire community that must continue to be subjected to their presence on our site, because that resource author elected to erase our ability to catch them and ban their account.

Those alone, are the reasons for my decision. Reports apply even to free resources, however, some additional points you may be interested in as a seller:

You’d forego your ability to post resource updates.
You’d forego your ability to restrict download access.
You’d forego your ability to add/edit/remove download licenses.
You’d forego your ability to use our subscription model for resources.
You’d forego your ability to charge a price higher than the third party service allows.
You’d forego your buyer tracking page, which contains all of the download evidence you’d forward to PayPal to fight chargebacks and scam reports on MCM, regardless of whether you’re the accused or the accuser.
You’d forego your ability to utilize our resource string injection feature, once implemented, and by extension, every bit of leak protection that you’d have available to you, to track leakers and get them banned from our website, not just so that they can’t continue to leak your product, but so that they can’t continue to leak the products of the rest of our community.

It doesn’t make sense for MCM to offer dependencies on services that we are actively striving to provide a better service than.

Well put Mr Justis.

Denied, thanks for the suggestion