Make free resources unmoderated

[Perotin]

Hello,

Title.

Reasons why:

• The current system of 1 person checking every resource is a waste of man-power
• It is also not 100% foolproof because humans make mistakes and there are ways to hide malicious code
• People who go on the internet should be responsible for what they download

 

[Justis]

I've done a count once, and I believe around 40% of the resources that are submitted end up deleted after I'm done moderating them.

Malicious content used to be a reoccurring issue, but it is now a rare occurrence. I agree with those who believe that dropping the manual approval will result in a large increase in malicious content again, especially since we allow the upload of .exe files, website files utilizing javascript and other programs. Unlike spigot for instance, where only spigot jars and skripts are upload.

However, as I've said, the malicious content is no longer a major issue at our current stage and hasn't been for a while. So the 40% of deletions obviously come from somewhere else.
That would be low quality content and content which contains other people's content, unlicensed forks, or content which we deny out of respect for their creators. See https://www.mc-market.org/wiki/redistribution-rights/

The fact that I review every single resource that gets uploaded to this site, and the fact that it is my job to ensure ownership rights and wishes are being adhered to means that I am the most capable of enforcing everyone's ownership wishes, and contradictory to your previous statement, am the most capable of ensuring the closest thing possible to consistency.
The community is a secondary protection, and we rely on them to report things on the off chance that I missed them, or if they were uploaded after the resource received approval.

One important thing to note is that a free resource can be made paid at any point in time.
In order to not moderate free resources, we would need to take this freedom away from every resource author, otherwise users could upload their resource as free and make it paid afterwards, thereby bypassing approval.

This is a major issue when you consider low quality content. Because low quality content is easily re-created, even accidentally; and then you have two users who believe the other person stole their work.
It is for the protection of these authors that we do not allow them to upload their work under-developed.
We don't want anyone becoming upset because we say we can't do anything about "their work" being published by someone else, and we certainly don't want any DMCA complaints against the files we're hosting.

In short: I believe that removing the manual approval will result in several things:
- Lower quality resources
- Abuse of the resource system
- Rights of content creators being violated
- More work for the moderation team as reports which previously would have rarely needed submission are created on the influx of unmoderated resources being submited

I do not want to moderate resources by myself, and I have been looking for a suitable addition to the team (not accepting offers under any circumstances), however, my priority is always to protect the community of MC-Market and anyone who may join in the future. That goes for their data, their rights, and the reputation their business receive as being platformed via our service.

I don't believe that the benefits your suggestion offers comes close to outweighing the negative effects it will have on the subjects of those priorities.

 

[Jinxed]

People who go on the internet should be responsible

That's gold.
Its like saying: Make monthly wages bigger and taxes lower, because life its better that way.

 

[Perotin]

I've done a count once, and I believe 40% of the resources that are submitted end up deleted after I'm done moderating them.

Malicious content used to be a reoccurring issue, but it is now a rare occurrence. I agree with those who believe that dropping the manual approval will result in a large increase in malicious content again, especially since we allow the upload of .exe files, website files utilizing javascript and other programs. Unlike spigot for instance, where only spigot jars and skripts are upload.

However, as I've said, the malicious content is no longer a major issue at our current stage and hasn't been for a while. So the 40% of deletions obviously come from somewhere else.
That would be low quality content and content which contains other people's content, unlicensed forks, or content which we deny out of respect for their creators. See https://www.mc-market.org/wiki/redistribution-rights/

The fact that I review every single resource that gets uploaded to this site, and the fact that it is my job to ensure ownership rights and wishes are being adhered to means that I am the most capable of enforcing everyone's ownership wishes, and contradictory to your previous statement, am the most capable of ensuring the closest thing possible to consistency.
The community is a secondary protection, and we rely on them to report things on the off chance that I missed them, or if they were uploaded after the resource received approval.

One important thing to note is that a free resource can be made paid at any point in time.
In order to not moderate free resources, we would need to take this freedom away from every resource author, otherwise users could upload their resource as free and make it paid afterwards, thereby bypassing approval.

This is a major issue when you consider low quality content. Because low quality content is easily re-created, even accidentally; and then you have two users who believe the other person stole their work.
It is for the protection of these authors that we do not allow them to upload their work under-developed.
We don't want anyone becoming upset because we say we can't do anything about "their work" being published by someone else, and we certainly don't want any DMCA complaints against the files we're hosting.

In short: I believe that removing the manual approval will result in several things:
- Lower quality resources
- Abuse of the resource system
- Rights of content creators being violated
- More work for the moderation team as reports which previously would have rarely needed submission are created on the influx of unmoderated resources being submited

I do not want to moderate resources by myself, and I have been looking for a suitable addition to the team (not accepting offers under any circumstances), however, my priority is always to protect the community of MC-Market and anyone who may join in the future. That goes for their data, their rights, and the reputation their business receive as being platformed via our service.

I don't believe that the benefits your suggestion offers comes close to outweighing the negative effects it will have on the subjects of those priorities.

Ultimately you know best, so consider this thread closed because I can't close it myself.

 

[Mick]

I've done a count once, and I believe around 40% of the resources that are submitted end up deleted after I'm done moderating them.

Malicious content used to be a reoccurring issue, but it is now a rare occurrence. I agree with those who believe that dropping the manual approval will result in a large increase in malicious content again, especially since we allow the upload of .exe files, website files utilizing javascript and other programs. Unlike spigot for instance, where only spigot jars and skripts are upload.

However, as I've said, the malicious content is no longer a major issue at our current stage and hasn't been for a while. So the 40% of deletions obviously come from somewhere else.
That would be low quality content and content which contains other people's content, unlicensed forks, or content which we deny out of respect for their creators. See https://www.mc-market.org/wiki/redistribution-rights/

The fact that I review every single resource that gets uploaded to this site, and the fact that it is my job to ensure ownership rights and wishes are being adhered to means that I am the most capable of enforcing everyone's ownership wishes, and contradictory to your previous statement, am the most capable of ensuring the closest thing possible to consistency.
The community is a secondary protection, and we rely on them to report things on the off chance that I missed them, or if they were uploaded after the resource received approval.

One important thing to note is that a free resource can be made paid at any point in time.
In order to not moderate free resources, we would need to take this freedom away from every resource author, otherwise users could upload their resource as free and make it paid afterwards, thereby bypassing approval.

This is a major issue when you consider low quality content. Because low quality content is easily re-created, even accidentally; and then you have two users who believe the other person stole their work.
It is for the protection of these authors that we do not allow them to upload their work under-developed.
We don't want anyone becoming upset because we say we can't do anything about "their work" being published by someone else, and we certainly don't want any DMCA complaints against the files we're hosting.

In short: I believe that removing the manual approval will result in several things:
- Lower quality resources
- Abuse of the resource system
- Rights of content creators being violated
- More work for the moderation team as reports which previously would have rarely needed submission are created on the influx of unmoderated resources being submited

I do not want to moderate resources by myself, and I have been looking for a suitable addition to the team (not accepting offers under any circumstances), however, my priority is always to protect the community of MC-Market and anyone who may join in the future. That goes for their data, their rights, and the reputation their business receive as being platformed via our service.

I don't believe that the benefits your suggestion offers comes close to outweighing the negative effects it will have on the subjects of those priorities.

Well put Justis.

Denied, thanks for the suggestion.