• 2

    posted a message on Community input into the idea of a resurrected server list


    As some of you may know, Minecraft Forum used to have it's own server list. This was like other sites in that you could post your server on it, and get votes to have your server rated higher. It also did have an auction system that let you bid to get your server to show up below posts to increase visibility. This list didn't last too long, and so was shut down some time ago.

    I have been currently pondering the resurrection of this list, but would like you, the community, to give your feedback into such a list.

    I am already well aware of the issues that the current forum has with regards to advertising servers (with the mess of how the rules work and how to promote your server without breaking them) and that it's hard to work within the rules to have your server seem active.

    I am here to gather your thoughts and input into what you'd like to see in a new server list. I'd hope to see answers from both servers owners who'd use such a list (both small and large servers) and what you as players look for in such a list.

    This does not mean it will come back, or that it'd have everything. I am currently weighing the options for it and if it would be worth the time and effort to see if it could be brought back.

    I left it as an open question so that you can give your feedback without thinking that it has to be related.

    If you didn't know the old system, it did offer the following:

    - A dedicated page for your server, where you could post comments and reply to them.

    - A status and player count, showing if your server was up and how many players were on it (this was cached, so it would be updated every X minutes)

    - An activity chart, showing how active your server was in terms of players

    - Voting, where you were able to vote and get rewards on the server if they configured it

    - Ranking, where the more players that voted for it, the higher it was on the list.

    My own input was that such a system is flawed from the start, where it benefits the large servers. This currently also exists in the current forum, where threads of certain nature are always more active than others. I envision a system which would be able to work with both small and large servers, attempting to treat them more fairly, while also offering a way for servers that use things such as a whitelist or graylist to function.

    Posted in: Forum Discussion & Info
  • 1

    posted a message on Bedrock forums split up?

    The editions were designed for before Bedrock came into being, and so are named that way to reflect that.

    Bedrock is actually just called "Minecraft" (thanks Mojang for the confusing naming), and so we do have a section dedicated to it here: https://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft

    In the case of looking for players, the section is https://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft/multiplayer

    We don't want to name it something Mojang does not call it, because that causes confusion, although anyone who was around before knows it as Bedrock, so it's confusing anyways. It's a catch-22.

    Posted in: Forum Discussion & Info
  • 1

    posted a message on What the hell is going on this forum?

    Appeals are not handled by the issuer, so if an admin issued a warning, then that admin cannot be involved in that appeal. Support also will not handle appeals, as that is outside of what they are there for.


    Posted in: Forum Discussion & Info
  • 4

    posted a message on Minecraft Launcher stuck on "preparing"

    Buy the game and use the updated launcher from https://minecraft.net

    Posted in: Java Edition Support
  • 2

    posted a message on Non-premium minecraft error

    We do not support piracy.

    Buy the game.

    Posted in: Java Edition Support
  • 1

    posted a message on TLauncher doesn't launch when on Forge 1.14.4

    We do not support cracked launchers.

    Posted in: Java Edition Support
  • 1

    posted a message on Suggestion: Please ban the use of adfly.

    We feasibly cannot ban adfly. This really would absolutely kill a lot of the creators and would make them go elsewhere, because then they cannot use MCF to get "rewarded" for their content. There is not a replacement that pays as well as adfly that users could use instead. If there was, it'd be better if they used that.

    I know adfly is terrible, and I'm one that would love to remove it, but within the impact that banning it would have would have such a backlash that it'd end up being more problematic.

    Optifine is an example of this. Banning optifine off our forum would be a huge hit to the modding section. Forge (until recently) used to use adfocus, so this would have prevented them from using MCF (they weren't but that's an example).

    It's sadly not something that we can really do without some way to still promote using our site for advertising the content.

    Posted in: Forum Discussion & Info
  • 2

    posted a message on Can we for the love of god get a 1.14 tag for mods please?

    Sorry for the wait. There was only 1 person who could add tags.

    1.14 was added now as a tag.

    We also re-ordered those tags so it's at least readable and also added Fabric.

    Posted in: Forum Discussion & Info
  • 1

    posted a message on Redirects for threads on old urls (e.g. /forums/mapping-and-modding) only work when signed out

    This is a known issue, and we'll look at how to fix it. The issue is the forum software never supported renames properly, so it's half functional and the way we worked around it causes issues.

    Posted in: Forum Discussion & Info
  • 1

    posted a message on Weird Glitch.


    Posted in: Discussion
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.