I've already broken it down for you in detail in the previous post.
25% - The net revenue for the mod author.
75% - The gross revenue for the content platform.
------
100% - The net price I pay.
Next, we break down the gross revenue from the Steam content platform.
30% - Net revenue for Valve corporation as content platform operator.
45% - Net revenue for Bethesda as the game publisher.
------
75% - Gross revenue from the sale of the mod.
I hope the inclusion of gross and net makes it easier. I'm running out of different ways to explain the same easy concept.
As for if Bethesda should get 45% or not, that isnt up to you to decide.
Yes, it is. The money in my wallet and bank account goes where I say it goes. When Activision started to sell $20 map packs, I stopped buying those games. When consoles started to require premium online services to pay the $60 games online, I stopped buying console games. If Bethesda wants to keep this up, I simply won't buy their next game.
The scary part for them is: I don't intend to avoid playing those games. I just won't be paying for them anymore. The same goes for modifications. It is ignorant to think any form of DRM could be included making SkyUI 5 an easy target for an example. It is the same as freemium gaming attempting to charge for extra lives when a simple modification to the game removes all the paid bits.
It may be sad but its fair.
Fair would have been more than dumping it on us. The backlash against it after Greenlight, Early Access, poor customer service, and so on is just driving it forward as people pile on with their own 2 cents. There is no fair anymore.
You cant keep somebody a slave because you are scared of what would happen if they were freed.
I've advocated a donation style system to support the favorites. If I make a purchase, there is nothing to incentivize the mod author except future sales. If I, and others donating, are basically employing the mod author instead of buying a prepared product, that is a bit better for the future development of the mod.