I've noticed some people wondering why some people get so worked up about this stuff, to the point of threatening to boycott Bethesda. Well, I've already said that I'm low on funds right now. But beyond that, as a consumer, voting with my wallet is the only thing I can really do to influence the decisions of a large company. And even then, I'm just one guy. It would take a huge number of people, all refusing to give Bethesda money, and all of them being vocal about why they're doing it (and everyone would need to follow through on it).

Also, keep in mind, there are companies that PC gamers hate, and there are companies that PC gamers love. Bethesda tends to be somewhere in between those two extremes. The free mod support is the main thing that keeps them out of the "hate" range, at least for me.

And to the guy who said I'll just keep buying Bethesda's stuff anyway... No, I really won't. The only reason I didn't wait till Skyrim GOTY/Ultimate Edition, was because they had that "Oh PC sales are the minority, so we'll focus on the 360." attitude. I wanted to show my support as a PC user by pre-ordering it. But if they mess up on Skyrim, then I really won't be buying anything else from them, at least not at launch.

After not having read the entire thread, because the first few pages were mostly crap:

Whiners!!!!!

I don't see why Wizzards Islands couldn't be a payable "mod" in comparison to standard Beth expansions. I also don't see why some better mods couldn't make the payable list. I can't think of good examples right now, but there were lots of great mods made in TES history. Success of such mods would greatly depend on them being payable and most of them would just fail, but I would love to have means to reward the modders that I find great. Perhaps it should be left to my own choice, but sometimes things just aren't that simple.

So stop complaining, more choice is always good for us and if some modders can only work their magic if they get paid for it, I guess market will decide if quality of their work is worth the asking price.

Detrimental to my point?

What point? I cut and pasted information that apparently had gone unread to most of the people in the discussion. I made no commentary, took no position and engaged in no debate. If you think I had some agenda to secretly lead people to believe something that wasn't true by maliciously editing a copy and pasted post, why would I identify and link to the source?

Mind boggling.