I have a question asking for clarification of the rules..
(I do not currently run a server, the example of *I* is theoretical)
rule in question..
On this note my example is this:
As of today 6/24/14, the server I operate reaches its "donation goal" (of for example $50) and the perk for that is 7 day XP boost.
Can I restrict that boost to only people who are/were playing/joined my server on or before the day the "reward" was earned?
example:
bonus earned for 7 days on the 24th, person who joins my server on the 25th does not have access to the added feature (as they were not part of the server community when the perk was earned)
The idea here is that, though the restriction is play based.. the new user was not there when the feature was earned by the community, thus has no access to it.
Whatever the next day that the ($50) donation mark is reached (we will say July 1st for example sake); the 7 day count for xp boost is given again, and the member who joined on the 25th now has a 7 day boost to XP along with all existing server members.. but the person who joins on July 2nd does not (until the bonus is earned again).
Would this, or would it not be breaking this new set of rules?
Edit to add..
Basically, I'm asking whether this server rule is allowed :
"To have access to a perk that was community earned, you must be a part of the community on or before the day/time that perk was earned"
No. Think of it like this donations mean to give without expecting anything in return if you restrict it to just a group of people it would not be fair so there for it would not work you are still selling some thing for the people that donated so no it dose not work you would have to give it to every one on you server not just a group of people.
the hole reason Mojang did this is to make server fair not unfair so it would be a violation of the rules
I hope all server go to a monthly fee. $15 a month like most other online games seem right. Come on pay to play servers!!!!! N
Pay to play will be the only viable way to host a modded minecraft server like feed the beast or technic.
Most kids will have to beg their parents for an account. The whineing in the fourms will start soon after the eula enforcement begins
Cant wait!!!!!
Most other online games are actual games and not servers of a game like . I would not pay a monthly fee for minecraft Ever. Especially considering there will be servers without that fee. A server is Not a MMO worthy of a 15$ monthly fee. Not to mention most actual MMOs coming out with a subscription cannot even keep up subscriptions enough and just end up going free to play. Even if they try it on a minecraft server doubt itll fly. Yet again, kids will probably be little brats and get their parents money without their consent.
No. Think of it like this donations mean to give without expecting anything in return if you restrict it to just a group of people it would not be fair so there for it would not work you are still selling some thing for the people that donated so no it dose not work you would have to give it to every one on you server not just a group of people.
the hole reason Mojang did this is to make server fair not unfair so it would be a violation of the rules
I think that when you read my question you misunderstood my phrasing. Mojang already states that having perks go out to players on a server for reaching donation goals is fine. My question is simply to clarify and fine tune that statement a bit better. Perks going out to *all players on a server* .. does that mean all players currently on the server(as of when perk is earned), or must it apply to all future players as well?
What I'd really like on this is official feedback, as I think it is a very valid question and point regarding the ability to deal with game altering mechanics, and who gets them and doesn't.
I don't think it is fair that if a group of players that have been on a server for months have reached a donation point and "earned" a server wide privlidge.. that someone who comes in after that was achieved gets to "ride on their success". I think that restricting according to the outline I laid out in my above example is more than reasonable, and allows for a simple non "pay for play" or "pay to win" way to monetise a server.
EX:
Monthly donationa total $50 -- server reward = XP boost rest of month
Monthly donations total $100 -- server reward = XP Boost + Fly for players rest of month
Monthly donations total $150 --- server reward = XP Boost + Fly + *diamond tool and armor kit* <<--this gets sketchy with the way the rules are now written
As of now.. giving out that special *kit* for reaching a donation goal is unclear. If a user joins *after* the date that the armor kit was given out as a reward.. are they still entitled to that reward?
I would say no. They have to wait until next month.. or the next time the server reaches that donation goal level. But it *could* be interpreted to be that once that kit was given to players.. everyone who ever joins the server again is now *entitled* to that perk.
If the server has run 12 months.. and reached that goal every month for those 12 months.. when a new player signs on to the server is it expected that they suddenly get 12 diamond armor kits?!? I don't think it should be, and I want to make sure that somewhere in the rules/guidelines that Mojang is making about servers, that this is spelled out more clearly.
I think that having the rule that I mentioned for servers...
"To have access to a perk that was community earned, you must be a part of the community on or before the day/time that perk was earned"
Should be expressly allowed by Mojang.. so that server operators have no fear of crossing the line if they don't provide *back earned perks* to new players.
Edit to Add..
There are a million and one ways the rule I have mentioned could be applied, perks that are kits earned server wide, towny based *extra free plots* given to existing members when a goal is hit etc.. the list is nearly endless. The point isn't to limit them to a group of players (only donators get the perks).. but to simply be able to limit them to *current* players, and to not have to try to get every back owed perk to someone who just signed in/up. I feel that giving *back owed perks* to new players would actually alter game balance on servers in a very negative way. If a person suddenly gets all of the kits and things the day they log in to a server for the first time, it will throw off server economies and server balance big time.
Server ops need the protection of giving perks to current players without having to worry about future players being *owed* perks just because of the day they signed up.
Alright, then. Here's a custom server implementation that needs no special client (I wasn't aware that C#raft did, but it's been a long time). I know for a fact that's true because I've used it before.
Disable any use of Mojang assets and use your own authentication.
What happens next?
I didn't see any name calling in the quoted post.
Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds? The server doesn't run by rules you enjoy and therefore it shouldn't exist?
The new EULA would be relevant if there were no alternatives to pay-to-win servers. That is simply not the case. Pay-to-win is not successful outside ultramassive servers that truly depend on the system to survive.
Not bad not bad at all that can work its i wanna see that project grow.
Ps: its not a new eula statment its just now they are enforcing it (but yhe same effect as adding a new statment just if you gana state something state it with the right wording so people dont take you as a fool because your not)
I have a question asking for clarification of the rules..
(I do not currently run a server, the example of *I* is theoretical)
rule in question..
On this note my example is this:
As of today 6/24/14, the server I operate reaches its "donation goal" (of for example $50) and the perk for that is 7 day XP boost.
Can I restrict that boost to only people who are/were playing/joined my server on or before the day the "reward" was earned?
example:
bonus earned for 7 days on the 24th, person who joins my server on the 25th does not have access to the added feature (as they were not part of the server community when the perk was earned)
The idea here is that, though the restriction is play based.. the new user was not there when the feature was earned by the community, thus has no access to it.
Whatever the next day that the ($50) donation mark is reached (we will say July 1st for example sake); the 7 day count for xp boost is given again, and the member who joined on the 25th now has a 7 day boost to XP along with all existing server members.. but the person who joins on July 2nd does not (until the bonus is earned again).
Would this, or would it not be breaking this new set of rules?
Edit to add..
Basically, I'm asking whether this server rule is allowed :
"To have access to a perk that was community earned, you must be a part of the community on or before the day/time that perk was earned"
scrap what the other guy said yes you can do time limited boost as long as a player can log on at the same time as another player who has the boost and that they can access it too witch oot any limitation
This is all absolute rubbish. I am a journalist and my husband is a lawyer, and we say NONSENSE.
Mojang cannot dictate gameplay of their game to any players or servers! It is not their right, any more than it is the right of Hasbro Games to dictate how individuals or Monopoly Clubs play the game of Monopoly! How absurd this is! Yet is has all the young server owners out there fooled and worried.
Mojang has sold a game to you. That is it. How you play that game is completely up to you! If you give perks to players that is YOUR CHOICE and Mojang has no rights over modifications NOT INVENTED BY THEMSELVES, or any other gameplay that is. It is a club that you have formed and your membership fee structure and how you allocate permissions to players is YOUR OWN BUSINESS.
What I would suggest to all server owners out there, that the only thing Mojang might be able to restrict, or anyone legally could restrict, would be personal profit from their game. Therefore, I STRONGLY advise that all server owners set up separate bank accounts for the club they run, the server fees to go into that and remain there to cover server costs. You should not make personal withdrawals from that account and all payments should have a clear trace of transaction. All above board. We all know perfectly well (but Mojang appears to be blind to) the fact that it is rare for a Minecraft server to make a profit. Keep your member donations/fees in one server account and that is fine. You are then not personally profiting from their game, you are simply managing a club and charging fees for its costs, all quite legal and necessary for any servers to be online, besides little home-based ones.
Mojang will, I predict, close up its open sourcing and try to charge for modpacks in future for its Realms. When they do, this will mark the death of Minecraft as the most popular game out there. And some bright young sparks will replace it with another open-source game for the clever young developers to create mods for. Foolish move, Mojang, if you do this.
The fact that mojang is destroying half of the community is saddening. Most of the servers will go down. It sucks most because of the fact that they're even taking down the poor servers that use the Little donation money they get to keep the server going. I hope they allow servers to take in donations.
More likely the smaller servers will survive due to smaller hosting costs.
No matter what excuses people have for charging players, its all irrelevant as its a COPYRIGHT issue. You cant make money off someone else's intellectual property if they say you cant, its as simple as that. People can jump up and down screaming and yelling all they like, its selling what belongs to someone else and you are not allowed.
If they don't care about you or the server enough to just donate, without expecting a "rank" in return, I say, close it down.
If they care about your server, and want to keep it up and running, wouldn't they continue to do business as usual?
I fully understand your point of view, no need to call names and make assumptions.
Completely agree with you Rampage, if the server cant survive on donations and the owners can't or wont pay for it then it will have to be shut down. Im sure most server owners run the server because they really like minecraft, its up to the owner to pay or fund the server through legal means as defined by Mojang. It is Mojang's property after all, and they get to say how people may use it.
Pay-to-play servers will now compete on both price and quality. This is a good thing. It will drive both the price down and quality up.
Servers can now accurately plan based on the number of subscriptions. If you have loads of new players, then you simply upgrade your hosting plan to more slots. If you have less players, then you downgrade. They don't have to plan based on the percentage of players that will actually "donate".
No more having to create increasingly convoluted incentives to get players to donate. Either you have enough paying players or you don't.
But what about those that played on the server, didn't pay and still got the same things ultimately, we just worked for them in game. At this point I cannot pay to get into those servers, and therefore it is 'restricting my game-play' because I cannot get into servers that have specialty mini games. People seem to forget about us that CANNOT pay and wouldn't pay if we could because paying entry to a server is far worse than paying for in game items. There is a reason the MMO market is heading towards "free to play" with in-game micro transactions compared to those "pay to play" ones in which people for the majority hate, no matter what you do people will complain and things will be unfair, because people will find a way to exploit everything.
But what about those that played on the server, didn't pay and still got the same things ultimately, we just worked for them in game. At this point I cannot pay to get into those servers, and therefore it is 'restricting my game-play' because I cannot get into servers that have specialty mini games. People seem to forget about us that CANNOT pay and wouldn't pay if we could because paying entry to a server is far worse than paying for in game items. There is a reason the MMO market is heading towards "free to play" with in-game micro transactions compared to those "pay to play" ones in which people for the majority hate, no matter what you do people will complain and things will be unfair, because people will find a way to exploit everything.
There will always be plenty of servers that you don't have pay.
There will always be plenty of servers that you don't have pay.
And you will always be able to tell the future. /sarcasm
You cannot guarantee that. One day minecraft WILL die, just like any other game. And when it does, there will be no servers to play on, incuding servers you won't have to play on.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Github ด้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้дด็็็็็้้้้้็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้
At first I was infuriated that they would do this to servers (I ran completely free servers in the past) however after looking for a minute I can see this as a business opportunity really (well not business but minecraft server starting). Whilst all the existing servers are squabbling in the dust so to speak new servers will pop up using new methods, set up a monthly weekly however often donating accumulation, and say $1 gets players on the server gets a spawner (from my understanding if every player gets the item there is no problem, I may be wrong, but you can't get a spawner legitimately anyway) $10 dollars get the players on the server the first level and a new minigame for the month. I see now not and end to a game but a rejuvenation. Imagine playing a server where you get a new gamemode every time the players reach a new donation goal as a whole
I really see this as improving the community drive rather than the selfish drive. I for one hate the pay to play idea, but I don't think they will last compared to community driven ideas which people seem to be forgetting are possible and I have seen servers that run like this already. I am scarred that people will not embrace this quickly and my favorite servers will die, but hopefully we are going to get some new very exciting servers beginning.
Yay! No more crazy people with OP kits killing me! Now everyone is equal! No more op-kits! its a dream!
Are you kidding? A) Those servers will probably shut down if forced to comply with the EULA same people will still have those kits and they probably won't be available to everyone (Mojang says they HAVE to be available to everyone, but there's no realistic way to enforce this) c) If you keep getting killed by OP kits on the server, why do you keep playing? It's not like there's only one kit pvp server out there.
This is all absolute rubbish. I am a journalist and my husband is a lawyer, and we say NONSENSE.
Mojang cannot dictate gameplay of their game to any players or servers! It is not their right, any more than it is the right of Hasbro Games to dictate how individuals or Monopoly Clubs play the game of Monopoly! How absurd this is! Yet is has all the young server owners out there fooled and worried.
Mojang has sold a game to you. That is it. How you play that game is completely up to you! If you give perks to players that is YOUR CHOICE and Mojang has no rights over modifications NOT INVENTED BY THEMSELVES, or any other gameplay that is. It is a club that you have formed and your membership fee structure and how you allocate permissions to players is YOUR OWN BUSINESS.
What I would suggest to all server owners out there, that the only thing Mojang might be able to restrict, or anyone legally could restrict, would be personal profit from their game. Therefore, I STRONGLY advise that all server owners set up separate bank accounts for the club they run, the server fees to go into that and remain there to cover server costs. You should not make personal withdrawals from that account and all payments should have a clear trace of transaction. All above board. We all know perfectly well (but Mojang appears to be blind to) the fact that it is rare for a Minecraft server to make a profit. Keep your member donations/fees in one server account and that is fine. You are then not personally profiting from their game, you are simply managing a club and charging fees for its costs, all quite legal and necessary for any servers to be online, besides little home-based ones.
Mojang will, I predict, close up its open sourcing and try to charge for modpacks in future for its Realms. When they do, this will mark the death of Minecraft as the most popular game out there. And some bright young sparks will replace it with another open-source game for the clever young developers to create mods for. Foolish move, Mojang, if you do this.
I highly doubt you are what you claim to be. If your husband is really a lawyer then you would fully understand that they are not saying you can't Give your players perks, but that they can't Sell them perks. You say later on that the only thing they can legally do is make sure you do not profit from their servers. DUH! That is what this whole thing is about! What in the world are you calling rubbish when this whole thing is nothing more then them inforcing their EULA?
You are right, how they give players perks is their own business. Provided they are not selling them and making money from them. You clearly show a lack of knowing what they are trying to do. Go play pretend lawyer and journalist somewhere else.
Second, they cannot charge for mod packs. They are player created. However, the creators cannot charge either since they are still using mojangs product. What I suggest, is no one listen to you and just simply comply with Mojang. All they are doing is trying to inforce their rules now. The only thing you stated that would help is keeping track of the money coming in and going to server maintence. Other then that, just comply and stop selling the items mojang has said you can't sell. If you can't keep your server up for what ever reason, then its A) Not good without highly op perks B ) Just doesn't have enough people willing / able to donate.
At first I was infuriated that they would do this to servers (I ran completely free servers in the past) however after looking for a minute I can see this as a business opportunity really (well not business but minecraft server starting). Whilst all the existing servers are squabbling in the dust so to speak new servers will pop up using new methods, set up a monthly weekly however often donating accumulation, and say $1 gets players on the server gets a spawner (from my understanding if every player gets the item there is no problem, I may be wrong, but you can't get a spawner legitimately anyway) $10 dollars get the players on the server the first level and a new minigame for the month.
If when you pay 1$ to get on, and everyone Has to pay that 1$ to get on, then yes giving them a spawner as well is ok. If you have a second bracket that gives everyone who pays 10$ something more, then that is not ok. You cannot seperate donor ranks with different for different levels of money given. It must be the same fee to get on across the board with the same thing given to everyone. As long as they code it in, you could get a spawn in multiple ways.
I own a company that rents out minecraft servers monthly.
If I am contacted to shutdown a server how should I handle that?
give the server owner a warning period inform majong that you have told the server owner if you see no change in acordance with eula stop the hosing of that server and do what you wish with the file wether it be delete them or arcive them.It would be smarter to arcive for a set number of days then delete
Also why is that formated like a list where there is only one thing
Why should a few exploitative servers ruin it for all the servers that allowed users to buy well balanced in-game items or abilities for resonable prices? If the big issue was servers pushing people to buy $500 donator kits, Mojang could just set a max donation perk amount of $100, and the issue would shrink dramatically.
If Mojang is serious about enforcing their new rules, I do have a few ideas for server owners who don't want to charge players a monthly/yearly fee. Web ads on the server's website and text ads broadcast in game chat periodically could make some money, especially for large servers. Another possibility is setting up two similar servers on seperate machines, and making one free-to-play and the other pay-to-play. The free-to-play server would have no donation perks, and the pay-to-play server would have all donation perks unlocked. As long as there is no way to move between the servers without manually disconnecting, this setup wouldn't violate the EULA.
Although I don't play EVE Online, I know it allows players to pay for their subscriptions through real money or in-game currency. After paying for a couple months with real money, players will be able to make enough game currency to pay their monthly fee, eliminating the real life cost. Would a system like this violate the new EULA?
No. Think of it like this donations mean to give without expecting anything in return if you restrict it to just a group of people it would not be fair so there for it would not work you are still selling some thing for the people that donated so no it dose not work you would have to give it to every one on you server not just a group of people.
the hole reason Mojang did this is to make server fair not unfair so it would be a violation of the rules
I think that when you read my question you misunderstood my phrasing. Mojang already states that having perks go out to players on a server for reaching donation goals is fine. My question is simply to clarify and fine tune that statement a bit better. Perks going out to *all players on a server* .. does that mean all players currently on the server(as of when perk is earned), or must it apply to all future players as well?
What I'd really like on this is official feedback, as I think it is a very valid question and point regarding the ability to deal with game altering mechanics, and who gets them and doesn't.
I don't think it is fair that if a group of players that have been on a server for months have reached a donation point and "earned" a server wide privlidge.. that someone who comes in after that was achieved gets to "ride on their success". I think that restricting according to the outline I laid out in my above example is more than reasonable, and allows for a simple non "pay for play" or "pay to win" way to monetise a server.
EX:
Monthly donationa total $50 -- server reward = XP boost rest of month
Monthly donations total $100 -- server reward = XP Boost + Fly for players rest of month
Monthly donations total $150 --- server reward = XP Boost + Fly + *diamond tool and armor kit* <<--this gets sketchy with the way the rules are now written
As of now.. giving out that special *kit* for reaching a donation goal is unclear. If a user joins *after* the date that the armor kit was given out as a reward.. are they still entitled to that reward?
I would say no. They have to wait until next month.. or the next time the server reaches that donation goal level. But it *could* be interpreted to be that once that kit was given to players.. everyone who ever joins the server again is now *entitled* to that perk.
If the server has run 12 months.. and reached that goal every month for those 12 months.. when a new player signs on to the server is it expected that they suddenly get 12 diamond armor kits?!? I don't think it should be, and I want to make sure that somewhere in the rules/guidelines that Mojang is making about servers, that this is spelled out more clearly.
I think that having the rule that I mentioned for servers...
"To have access to a perk that was community earned, you must be a part of the community on or before the day/time that perk was earned"
Should be expressly allowed by Mojang.. so that server operators have no fear of crossing the line if they don't provide *back earned perks* to new players.
Edit to Add..
There are a million and one ways the rule I have mentioned could be applied, perks that are kits earned server wide, towny based *extra free plots* given to existing members when a goal is hit etc.. the list is nearly endless. The point isn't to limit them to a group of players (only donators get the perks).. but to simply be able to limit them to *current* players, and to not have to try to get every back owed perk to someone who just signed in/up. I feel that giving *back owed perks* to new players would actually alter game balance on servers in a very negative way. If a person suddenly gets all of the kits and things the day they log in to a server for the first time, it will throw off server economies and server balance big time.
Server ops need the protection of giving perks to current players without having to worry about future players being *owed* perks just because of the day they signed up.
Not bad not bad at all that can work its i wanna see that project grow.
Ps: its not a new eula statment its just now they are enforcing it (but yhe same effect as adding a new statment just if you gana state something state it with the right wording so people dont take you as a fool because your not)
scrap what the other guy said yes you can do time limited boost as long as a player can log on at the same time as another player who has the boost and that they can access it too witch oot any limitation
Mojang cannot dictate gameplay of their game to any players or servers! It is not their right, any more than it is the right of Hasbro Games to dictate how individuals or Monopoly Clubs play the game of Monopoly! How absurd this is! Yet is has all the young server owners out there fooled and worried.
Mojang has sold a game to you. That is it. How you play that game is completely up to you! If you give perks to players that is YOUR CHOICE and Mojang has no rights over modifications NOT INVENTED BY THEMSELVES, or any other gameplay that is. It is a club that you have formed and your membership fee structure and how you allocate permissions to players is YOUR OWN BUSINESS.
What I would suggest to all server owners out there, that the only thing Mojang might be able to restrict, or anyone legally could restrict, would be personal profit from their game. Therefore, I STRONGLY advise that all server owners set up separate bank accounts for the club they run, the server fees to go into that and remain there to cover server costs. You should not make personal withdrawals from that account and all payments should have a clear trace of transaction. All above board. We all know perfectly well (but Mojang appears to be blind to) the fact that it is rare for a Minecraft server to make a profit. Keep your member donations/fees in one server account and that is fine. You are then not personally profiting from their game, you are simply managing a club and charging fees for its costs, all quite legal and necessary for any servers to be online, besides little home-based ones.
Mojang will, I predict, close up its open sourcing and try to charge for modpacks in future for its Realms. When they do, this will mark the death of Minecraft as the most popular game out there. And some bright young sparks will replace it with another open-source game for the clever young developers to create mods for. Foolish move, Mojang, if you do this.
More likely the smaller servers will survive due to smaller hosting costs.
No matter what excuses people have for charging players, its all irrelevant as its a COPYRIGHT issue. You cant make money off someone else's intellectual property if they say you cant, its as simple as that. People can jump up and down screaming and yelling all they like, its selling what belongs to someone else and you are not allowed.
Completely agree with you Rampage, if the server cant survive on donations and the owners can't or wont pay for it then it will have to be shut down. Im sure most server owners run the server because they really like minecraft, its up to the owner to pay or fund the server through legal means as defined by Mojang. It is Mojang's property after all, and they get to say how people may use it.
But what about those that played on the server, didn't pay and still got the same things ultimately, we just worked for them in game. At this point I cannot pay to get into those servers, and therefore it is 'restricting my game-play' because I cannot get into servers that have specialty mini games. People seem to forget about us that CANNOT pay and wouldn't pay if we could because paying entry to a server is far worse than paying for in game items. There is a reason the MMO market is heading towards "free to play" with in-game micro transactions compared to those "pay to play" ones in which people for the majority hate, no matter what you do people will complain and things will be unfair, because people will find a way to exploit everything.
There will always be plenty of servers that you don't have pay.
And you will always be able to tell the future. /sarcasm
You cannot guarantee that. One day minecraft WILL die, just like any other game. And when it does, there will be no servers to play on, incuding servers you won't have to play on.
My Github ด้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้дด็็็็็้้้้้็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้็็็็็้้้้้
well duhh....and one day the sun will burn out, but it wont be for a long time yet.
I really see this as improving the community drive rather than the selfish drive. I for one hate the pay to play idea, but I don't think they will last compared to community driven ideas which people seem to be forgetting are possible and I have seen servers that run like this already. I am scarred that people will not embrace this quickly and my favorite servers will die, but hopefully we are going to get some new very exciting servers beginning.
Are you kidding? A) Those servers will probably shut down if forced to comply with the EULA
You are right, how they give players perks is their own business. Provided they are not selling them and making money from them. You clearly show a lack of knowing what they are trying to do. Go play pretend lawyer and journalist somewhere else.
Second, they cannot charge for mod packs. They are player created. However, the creators cannot charge either since they are still using mojangs product. What I suggest, is no one listen to you and just simply comply with Mojang. All they are doing is trying to inforce their rules now. The only thing you stated that would help is keeping track of the money coming in and going to server maintence. Other then that, just comply and stop selling the items mojang has said you can't sell. If you can't keep your server up for what ever reason, then its A) Not good without highly op perks B ) Just doesn't have enough people willing / able to donate.
Well, doubt you can report anyone yet since they gave them a grace period of until August 1st to comply.
give the server owner a warning period inform majong that you have told the server owner if you see no change in acordance with eula stop the hosing of that server and do what you wish with the file wether it be delete them or arcive them.It would be smarter to arcive for a set number of days then delete
Also why is that formated like a list where there is only one thing
If Mojang is serious about enforcing their new rules, I do have a few ideas for server owners who don't want to charge players a monthly/yearly fee. Web ads on the server's website and text ads broadcast in game chat periodically could make some money, especially for large servers. Another possibility is setting up two similar servers on seperate machines, and making one free-to-play and the other pay-to-play. The free-to-play server would have no donation perks, and the pay-to-play server would have all donation perks unlocked. As long as there is no way to move between the servers without manually disconnecting, this setup wouldn't violate the EULA.
Although I don't play EVE Online, I know it allows players to pay for their subscriptions through real money or in-game currency. After paying for a couple months with real money, players will be able to make enough game currency to pay their monthly fee, eliminating the real life cost. Would a system like this violate the new EULA?