In my opinion I don't think it makes that much sense to get mad over portlegs. Either the mod is never going to get ported because it's from Final Demo or some other ancient version of the game, or it's a mod that's already getting a port. I can see why it'd be demoralizing to mod makers for their mods to get ported before the official one is finished, but at the same time the official port is pretty much guaranteed to be better. As far as I know, none of the portlegs on there add anything. They're just straight ports from 2.1 to 2.2. Though this hasn't happened to me, so I don't think I have a place to comment on it anyway.
I COMPLETELY agree with you on this. Your
ancient-ass mod 9/10 isn't gonna be ported to 2.2 by
you, so let people
who actually enjoyed your work do it
for you. As for the argument of "theres a port WIP why r u porting the old one", I treat those type of portlegs as
demos. Treat them as a precursor to what the dev is cooking up behind the scenes for you. I
really don't get why people have issues with portlegs of a WIP 2.2 port. It's not like they're taking credit for it, are they? And honestly, that should just be a Submissions rule:
Mandatory credit given for specifically ports to 2.2. "b-but what if they say its their own mod???" We have moderators for a reason folks.
It's like if I were to take someone's sculpture, slap something I think is neat on it, and only then call it art once I've modified it. Just be happy with what you're given. If you're going to edit a mod, don't spread it around or make it an additional file separate from the original mod (for example a .lua file giving Silver the ability to blow things up without editing Silver's .pk3 file).
I actually like this example here, showcasing the issue that people slap portlegs with. I honestly have not seen any cases with portleggers taking credit for a port (if there is examples pls link them), so I feel that this specific arguement
doesn't work.
Those reports aren’t true, people get banned for mods that break the MS rules, but hosting with mods from unofficial forums isn’t among those rules. It’s mods with STOLEN CONTENT specifically that will get you banned, IF the original creator reports it.
The fact that “stolen content” and “Workshop mods” are so ubiquitous might be a sign that there’s an issue with the latter.
That's because the Red Sphere section practically violates the reusability rules, so it's deemed really
stolen, and also consider that some people (maybe most) consider the WS
as stolen content.
This misses the point, because what we actually have here in the community is "You can edit people's work as long as you weren't explicitly asked not to."
It's right here in the submissions rules, Rule 12. (We do ask that people see if the author has any feelings on it if they can, but only because it's a relatively small community and it's not out of the question to try)
While I understand to respect people's wishes, what if it
was reusable? Then
suddenly its not, and now your entire mod is ruined. They were
perfectly ok before, but now they changed their mind on a whim, without any communication to me, the modder of his mod.
How is that fair? Also, I'm gonna stop taking Sandwich's points on the errors of the reusability system, just watch the vid
right here. And before I get a reply saying he doesn't give a shit on "artists", WATCH THE DAMN VIDEO. I say this
strictly for context, as this points out a lot of things wrong with the reusability system.