Don't be silly. Even temnix (!), the guy who doesn't want to gee specific when he asks for guidance because he's worried about people stealing his modding secrets, said he has no problem with changes made "on players' machines." Which is where the FixPack is applied.
Anyway who cares?? If someone ridiculously says "I don't want the FixPack touching my mod" why not let that modder stew in their bugs?
For me, I don't care a whit - go ahead and FixPack anything you like about my mods. Of course if you don't
tell me about the bugs you find/fix, and I update the mod for other reasons, and the version difference messes up the FixPack, that's unfortunate... but honestly not the end of the world.
Honestly it might be worth a
calm, rational conversation about the FixPack and best practices. I was hoing to liken the FP to hotfixes in relationship to modder permission; I've made a bunch of hotfixes, such as for DR and
SCS etc., and I never asked permission. So this supports Creepin's opinion just above.
BUT, the FP is not a bunch of hotfixes. It changes the mods, and there is a real (if remote) danger there. Someone who is not familiar with my mod, making changes to it, might inadvertantly screw things up. Say I have a non-functioning 172 effect because the target spell is 8 letters long; the FP might rename it to make the removal effect work. But what if some other component - or some other mod - uses that 8-letter file in a REQUIRE_FILE or an ACTION_IF FILE_EXISTS...?
Actual hotfixes, that fix things
after a mod is installed, seem safer/better in a number of ways. Another benefit is, depending on the way the fix is coded, it might never cause problems or get out-of date, even if a mod is updated.
Of course that's not always true; sometimes modifying the install code is the best or only way to fix the mod. The FP is definitely a great thing, which I value and appreciate. But Maybe it's worth considering having two different kinds of FixPacks: a pre-install FixPack, and a post-install HotFixPack.