As some are already aware, I have been debating and discussing some potential changes to my third-party modifications policies. For those not aware (or who wish to be reminded): Due to the backlash that the rules have generated, and the fact that I have since realized means with which I can permit some 'legitimate' modification without reintroducing all the old problems, I have been working out a new ruleset. This ruleset would permit the kind of modification most packs want or need while still protecting me against users who break the mod then blame me for the changes, people playing modified versions of the mod then assuming I am responsible for the modifications, and helping me ensure the integrity of the mod. I have mentioned versions of this idea before, and was met with some support. I have decided that I am going to move ahead with a version of this plan. Basically, under the new rules, pack authors would now be permitted to make some changes to RotaryCraft, its addons, or ChromatiCraft, within certain restrictions. Server operators, unless making a custom pack (in which case they become pack authors for the purposes of the rules), remain bound by the old rules, and must use the mod 'as is' or 'as the pack set it'. The new freedoms for pack authors would allow them to do things like change recipes, so long as the following criteria are met: Someone representing the pack (usually the author) must come to me and explain all of the changes they wish to make. This allows me to allows me to inform pack makers that their changes may be detrimental, redundant, or similar, and to ensure the other criteria are met; I will only disallow a change if it violates one of the criteria. Any changes not disclosed to me are assumed to have been kept as such in order to avoid following the rules, and are strictly forbidden. The pack author must have a fairly clear understanding of the effects their changes will have; for example, pack authors may not make changes without even having tried unmodified versions of a mod, or without understanding the system they are modifying. A few specific things will remain disallowed; almost all of these are "sounds like a good idea but really a bad idea" kind of changes. A few examples will be given near the end of this post. All modifications must be in good faith. Any modifications done in bad faith are totally disallowed. Bad faith modifications include but are not limited to: Modifications intended generate headaches for me, such as by spawning bug reports Modifications designed to enable monetization of my content Modifications designed to "justify" taking partial or complete credit for the mods Modifications designed to tarnish my or my mods' reputation, such as by worsening its stability or deliberately unbalancing it The mod's fundamental identity must remain intact. For example, RotaryCraft must not be converted to an RF mod, ChromatiCraft may not be turned into a ThaumCraft addon, and ReactorCraft reactor design may not be subverted. This also means that the resulting product has to make some sort of sense; things like "all RotaryCraft crafting is done as TC infusion" or "all ChromatiCraft items are TF dungeon loot" do not. I will maintain a publicly viewable list all packs that make changes and what changes they make. This serves primarily as a record of who does what, but also provides a defence against people who want to blame me for the changes, as well as filtering out the occasional "I want to make changes that noone knows about" (that I cannot see a legitimate reason for existing). Also for providing defence and reducing bug report count, I will be adding a functionality to my handbooks that adds a special config file that allows for a pack author to specify any changes they make, so that any pack-level changes can be documented in the handbook. All of the pack's changes to my mods must be documented here. The pack developer must make it reasonably clear in their pack description (or its equivalent) that they have made modifications to my mods and have gotten permission to do so, linking to the list mentioned above. If a modification starts spawning rumors, bug reports, harassment, or similar and the pack author makes no attempt to take responsibility or dispel the effects, the modification must be revised so as to try to keep its original purpose but stop causing problems. If this is not possible, or the pack author is unwilling to make that effort, the modification must be reverted. All modifications must be done though accepted tools, such as MineTweaker. Things like ASM or bytecode editing are not permitted, not least because they severely harm stability or carry a strong connotation of subversion. Any modifications not granted permission through this system remain disallowed. EDIT: Read through some of my other posts on this thread; that first point has been revised to be a bit more open. http://forum.feed-the-beast.com/threads/rc-rec-elc-cc-policy-changes.91274/page-7#post-1241637 Sample "sounds like a good idea but actually a bad idea" modifications that will not be granted permission: OreDicting my Sintered Tungsten ingots with those from another mod, especially one directly obtainable from ore; this is a change that sounds like it "promotes intercompatibility and mod harmony", but in actuality allows players to skip to near the end of the RC techtree, something very likely unforeseen to the pack author OreDicting my Bedrock Alloy ingots with ExU bedrockium; similar reason to above, and even more severely unbalancing Unification of my jet fuel with BC fuel; same reason as above Removing the power converter (like magnetostatic) gating systems, either by adding easier recipes for the upgrades, making the T5s craftable directly These changes will take effect with the release of v7; pack authors must update to v7 to take advantage of the new freedoms.