I can't comment on the mods in question.
I just want to say that I hope this isn't "inspired" by all the recent talk about how terribly biased the BWS is.
Just because some people raise concerns doesn't mean they are right or that what they suggest is the best for the BWS. This is especially true if some of those people have made it abundantly clear in the past that they do not like the BWS in general and would rather have people not use it at all..
Whether the creators intended for it to be or not, the BWS has always been opinionated and it needs to be. If I am presented with multiple conflicting mods I want an experienced opinion as to which one provides the most stable experience, closest to vanilla content quality. The BWS doesn't prevent people from making a different choice, it instead provides them with easy access to the mods' hompages for a deeper inspection.
If an unexperienced user gets presented with 17 mod conflicts in their mega mod install and the BWS is like "Yeah, have fun figuring that out" then why would anyone even want to use the tool at all?
Nearly all of them are now removed. All choices are given to the users
I mean, if the mods removed from the expert list are indeed not causing any more issues then it is of course the right move to unflag them but somehow I can't believe that "nearly all of them" suddenly got updates overnight?
Maybe I should have provided more background but I did not want to write a whole novel about it.
This is mostly related to the EE part of the BG support of BWS.
I have already commented that the *recommended* and *tactical* etc selections in BG2EE and EET do no longer make sense. Most mods inherited their status from BGT - but quite a lot of them appear in new versions, especially the Big Mods are often quite different from their classic counterparts. And then we have a large number of new and dedicated EE mods that have not gained any status yet. The mistake made was to carry the old concept over from BGT to EET but it is not valid.
It gets even more complex with the tweak/rules/kit/item mods. Those often have been tuned/upgraded for the EE games and even new ones are created. BWS has suggested that they know about some *recommended* settings but it is simply not the case.
It is very much that we have opened a new chapter in the game's history and should look at it all anew. We have currently some basic ideas about the SCS and EET_Tweaks settings for EET if you are not looking at tactical or all-you-can-get installs. This is about all. Currently the BWS gives the impression as if there is some consolidated knowledge (like you expressed in your post) that should be shared. But honestly there is not.
Even if some people may have gone a bit overboard with their wording and mixing personal accusations and dislikes into the argument, there is some truth in the kernel statement that BWS for EE is better off with more freedom of choice than the false impression of giving you a nice game on a one-click.
I think it is also fair to all the new and inventive mods that are now available to be given the same chance as old established ones and not give them those the extra credit of *recommended*. Users know this by now anyway.
If we had still the possibility to remove all those pre-settings and pre-selections from EE-BWS, I am all for it.