7 ms·

So it’s expensive and hard. So what? Doesn’t mean scummy play to win bullshit is something to be proud of, especially when targeting children. I mean, what Moj

by arrrg 12y ago

So it’s expensive and hard. So what? Doesn’t mean scummy play to win bullshit is something to be proud of, especially when targeting children. I mean, what Mojang now permits I consider just barely ethically acceptable. Do know that these pay to win schemes are extremely disgusting and that you are far from behaving ethically if you use them. If you can live with that … The legal discussion is kind of boring to me in that context, since it seems so obvious that the behaviour of many server owners is so disgusting. I’m happy that Mojang is trying to crack down on that and I hope they don’t fail. Maybe they will, but that doesn’t change anything about how wrong these pay to win schemes are.

unethical_ban 12y ago
So what? So it's incredibly hard to even enforce what Mojang says they're targeting, and in trying to do so, they're spooking a ton of legitimate developers and server owners. The real question is how children are spending hundreds of dollars online without parental consent.
- zacinbusiness 12y ago
  Yeah I generally don't think it'd be a good idea to give kids access to parental bank accounts. Maybe I'm wrong, but it just seems like a poor decision.
  - Alupis 12y ago
    Guys, this isn't "about the kids", it's about all minecraft players and server admins. The contract doesn't only apply to kids, it applies to everyone. So saying this is a "poor decision" because you don't want to encourage kids to use their parents credit card... is a poor argument. (as an aside - I know zero kids that play minecraft, but I know an awful lot of adults that do... so let's not just jump and assume it's only kids playing this game).
    - seanflyon 12y ago
      Most elementary school aged kids I have talked to play Minecraft. I heard from a teacher that it is the vast majority.
    - unethical_ban 12y ago
      I know the EULA is universal, but all the defenders of "no-free-to-play" cite the "for the children" defense as the reason why this is such a pressing issue now. As a player, Minecraft is only free-to-play if you voluntarily pay a server owner. If someone doesn't like a server, log into a different one! If you want to put in dozens of hours on a world without fear of it being griefed/having the rules changed, run your own small server! My thesis is that this is basically a non-issue. If Mojang wants people to know they're not the ones charging for server access (the parent anecdote in the article), they should have a big, permanent banner in the server browser: "If you're paying for items on a server, you're paying too much! Minecraft server access is free by default!" and so on.
- techtalsky 12y ago
  No, that's not really "the real question". Kids are smart. The know how to get what they want and parents can't be everywhere at any moment. SOME percentage of kids are going to figure out how to pay for goods with very little understanding of their relative value. Preying on kids in this position skirts the borders of what's ethical. I'm not saying all server owners are guilty of this, but Mojang has their position for a reason and it's not just the profit motive.
  - spain 12y ago
    If kids outwit their parents and spend their money then that's the parents fault, not the servers. True, the parents can't always be everywhere which is why they need to teach children to act responsibly. If that kid keeps continuously taking money out of your bank account when you're not looking and blowing it on Minecraft then the parent is doing something wrong. If there was no Minecraft they'd spend the money on something else. I don't see why server hosts should be punished because some parents failed to bring their children up properly.
    - ovulator 12y ago
      That's ridiculous. Some ten year old kid wants a $300 item on a Minecraft server. The kid has been told he can't use his parent's credit card without permission, he knows he can't, but guess what: even good kids break the rules, and he knows his parents have the money. He just saw them write a $5,000 check for his private tuition! (they want to raise him right) That $5,000 check though left them with $200 in the bank for the rest of the month... I'm not for or against server monitization, but trying to blame the parents is ridiculous. Kids are not exact molds that their parents have shaped.
      - chc 12y ago
        That's extremely true, but at any rate, I can't see any way around the fact that the actions of their child and the use of their credit card are more their responsibility than the server owner's. (Even if they don't control their child, neither does a random Minecraft server owner!)
Alupis 12y ago
There is really no "play to win" in Minecraft, because there is no "winning". You just keep doing things until you get bored and stop playing. As someone who can run my own server for myself and a few friends (and have on multiple occasions), I don't see how allowing servers to charge for some things is bad... don't want to pay for access to an item -- go play someplace else or host your own.
- derefr 12y ago
  For the same reason that the elderly will call their web browser "the Googles", children will also tend to think of the first implementation of a concept they find as the definitive one. The idea will never occur to them that there's any other Minecraft server than Bob's Private MineCraft Capitalism Extravaganza that their friend introduced them to and plays on.
  - Alupis 12y ago
    I think that's besides the point. This contract isn't "about the kids", it's about all Minecraft players and server administrators. If a server administrator feels they need to, or want to charge for some item or plugin, they should have the freedom to do so... ...after all, they aren't obligated to run a minecraft server in the first place, and if the only thing keeping the lights on is selling some in-game item, let it be.
  - spain 12y ago
    Children aren't smart, this much is known. This is fighting the symptom, not the cause. The real issue is that children who can't spend their money responsibly shouldn't have that money in the first place. If we go by the assumption that a child won't know when they're paying for a legitimate product or being exploited then why give them any money? If they don't spend it on a pay-to-win server then they'll spend it somewhere else and be "exploited" just as much, possibly on an iPhone game or something. If I give my child $1000 and they blow it on a Minecraft server then that's my fault for giving them that much money, not theirs. Children shouldn't be given that much disposable income if they can't use it properly. Punishing server hosts for the mistakes of poor parenting is not the right solution.
angersock 12y ago
When you've added enough patches, operations, and hardware to the initial game, I think it's totally reasonable to be able to charge for that. Mojang should just sell a license of the server software (perhaps with better patches, yeah?) to resellers, ala cPanel or what have you. They basically have this one-trick-pony which is now effectively maintained by the community at zero cost to them--no wonder they're being silly. EDIT: Somebody should just release an extendable open-source clone of the game, with art assets, and just force their hand.
wtbob 12y ago
What's scummy about a server owner giving me a nice starting house in return for a payment? What's scummy about a server owner giving me /feed or /fly in return for payment? There's nothing deceptive; there's nothing unfair about offering a free server with perks (anyone is free to pay or do without). I'm an adult, and I choose how to spend my disposable income.
- GhotiFish 12y ago
  well the point is, no one cares. You're an adult that spent some money on something of dubious value, but you were expected to be able to value it. Now your ownership of that is being seen by a kid, who assumes he's your peer. That kid never had a chance.

by arrrg 12y ago

unethical_ban 12y ago

So what? So it's incredibly hard to even enforce what Mojang says they're targeting, and in trying to do so, they're spooking a ton of legitimate developers and server owners. The real question is how children are spending hundreds of dollars online without parental consent.

zacinbusiness 12y ago
Yeah I generally don't think it'd be a good idea to give kids access to parental bank accounts. Maybe I'm wrong, but it just seems like a poor decision.
- Alupis 12y ago
  Guys, this isn't "about the kids", it's about all minecraft players and server admins. The contract doesn't only apply to kids, it applies to everyone. So saying this is a "poor decision" because you don't want to encourage kids to use their parents credit card... is a poor argument. (as an aside - I know zero kids that play minecraft, but I know an awful lot of adults that do... so let's not just jump and assume it's only kids playing this game).
  - seanflyon 12y ago
    Most elementary school aged kids I have talked to play Minecraft. I heard from a teacher that it is the vast majority.
  - unethical_ban 12y ago
    I know the EULA is universal, but all the defenders of "no-free-to-play" cite the "for the children" defense as the reason why this is such a pressing issue now. As a player, Minecraft is only free-to-play if you voluntarily pay a server owner. If someone doesn't like a server, log into a different one! If you want to put in dozens of hours on a world without fear of it being griefed/having the rules changed, run your own small server! My thesis is that this is basically a non-issue. If Mojang wants people to know they're not the ones charging for server access (the parent anecdote in the article), they should have a big, permanent banner in the server browser: "If you're paying for items on a server, you're paying too much! Minecraft server access is free by default!" and so on.
techtalsky 12y ago
No, that's not really "the real question". Kids are smart. The know how to get what they want and parents can't be everywhere at any moment. SOME percentage of kids are going to figure out how to pay for goods with very little understanding of their relative value. Preying on kids in this position skirts the borders of what's ethical. I'm not saying all server owners are guilty of this, but Mojang has their position for a reason and it's not just the profit motive.
- spain 12y ago
  If kids outwit their parents and spend their money then that's the parents fault, not the servers. True, the parents can't always be everywhere which is why they need to teach children to act responsibly. If that kid keeps continuously taking money out of your bank account when you're not looking and blowing it on Minecraft then the parent is doing something wrong. If there was no Minecraft they'd spend the money on something else. I don't see why server hosts should be punished because some parents failed to bring their children up properly.
  - ovulator 12y ago
    That's ridiculous. Some ten year old kid wants a $300 item on a Minecraft server. The kid has been told he can't use his parent's credit card without permission, he knows he can't, but guess what: even good kids break the rules, and he knows his parents have the money. He just saw them write a $5,000 check for his private tuition! (they want to raise him right) That $5,000 check though left them with $200 in the bank for the rest of the month... I'm not for or against server monitization, but trying to blame the parents is ridiculous. Kids are not exact molds that their parents have shaped.
    - chc 12y ago
      That's extremely true, but at any rate, I can't see any way around the fact that the actions of their child and the use of their credit card are more their responsibility than the server owner's. (Even if they don't control their child, neither does a random Minecraft server owner!)

Alupis 12y ago

There is really no "play to win" in Minecraft, because there is no "winning". You just keep doing things until you get bored and stop playing. As someone who can run my own server for myself and a few friends (and have on multiple occasions), I don't see how allowing servers to charge for some things is bad... don't want to pay for access to an item -- go play someplace else or host your own.

derefr 12y ago
For the same reason that the elderly will call their web browser "the Googles", children will also tend to think of the first implementation of a concept they find as the definitive one. The idea will never occur to them that there's any other Minecraft server than Bob's Private MineCraft Capitalism Extravaganza that their friend introduced them to and plays on.
- Alupis 12y ago
  I think that's besides the point. This contract isn't "about the kids", it's about all Minecraft players and server administrators. If a server administrator feels they need to, or want to charge for some item or plugin, they should have the freedom to do so... ...after all, they aren't obligated to run a minecraft server in the first place, and if the only thing keeping the lights on is selling some in-game item, let it be.
- spain 12y ago
  Children aren't smart, this much is known. This is fighting the symptom, not the cause. The real issue is that children who can't spend their money responsibly shouldn't have that money in the first place. If we go by the assumption that a child won't know when they're paying for a legitimate product or being exploited then why give them any money? If they don't spend it on a pay-to-win server then they'll spend it somewhere else and be "exploited" just as much, possibly on an iPhone game or something. If I give my child $1000 and they blow it on a Minecraft server then that's my fault for giving them that much money, not theirs. Children shouldn't be given that much disposable income if they can't use it properly. Punishing server hosts for the mistakes of poor parenting is not the right solution.

angersock 12y ago

When you've added enough patches, operations, and hardware to the initial game, I think it's totally reasonable to be able to charge for that. Mojang should just sell a license of the server software (perhaps with better patches, yeah?) to resellers, ala cPanel or what have you. They basically have this one-trick-pony which is now effectively maintained by the community at zero cost to them--no wonder they're being silly. EDIT: Somebody should just release an extendable open-source clone of the game, with art assets, and just force their hand.

wtbob 12y ago

What's scummy about a server owner giving me a nice starting house in return for a payment? What's scummy about a server owner giving me /feed or /fly in return for payment? There's nothing deceptive; there's nothing unfair about offering a free server with perks (anyone is free to pay or do without). I'm an adult, and I choose how to spend my disposable income.

GhotiFish 12y ago
well the point is, no one cares. You're an adult that spent some money on something of dubious value, but you were expected to be able to value it. Now your ownership of that is being seen by a kid, who assumes he's your peer. That kid never had a chance.