Verified Hosts and Other Hosts

[Elcro]

Hello MCM,

Recently discussed on this thread: http://www.mc-market.org/threads/41248/page-2#post-498260 Dot-Tech LLC mentioned, and a few others. I think that MCM could use a 'Verified Hosts' Section for hosts that are approved by Mick and a section for 'Other Hosts' For any hosting providers that have not yet been approved by Mick.

Be sure to vote in the poll, and I hope to see this become a reality in the future.

Thanks,
Elcro

 

[Ian.D]

This would be awesome if Mick could add it. It would help sort the professional and legit hosting companies from the new "companies" that are not proven yet and may close down after a week. This will help assure users looking for hosting that the "Verified Host" can be trusted with the clients money and will not just take the money and run. This would also help us Hosts out who did take the time to get proper equipment, licensing, and custom website (not an edited website from ThemeForest) in showing this forum has verified they are a legit host. In this past year there has been an immense flood of "kitty" hosts that open into the market charging relatively low prices, offering a sale of goods they can never be held to. Most of the time these "kitty" hosts die off and the owners take the money and run and let the client files get delete. This has really ruined the Minecraft hosting and server market in general, normally with the loss of the files from the kitty host shutting down the server owner never re-opens the server. In short terms both users and hosting companies have suffered far to long.

I recommend these ideas.
Other Hosts:
Any new hosting "company" can post in this section. Once they have received enough vouches, can show proof they are a registered company, and have shown proof they can be trusted, they can move to "Verified Hosts" section.

Verified Hosts:
Can only post in this section after posting in the other hosts section.

There are like the rules MineCraftForum had/has though in the last year they have stopped moving hosts.

Anyways this is just my opinion.

 

[Shattered]

I think this idea is silly...

new people dont get business, and verifying a host really means anything, a user can judge a hosting company by themselves by looking at the website and some past reviews.

 

[Harambe]

Yea, that would separate the real hosting from the Christmas money hosting... xD

 

[chucK_]

YES IT PREVENTS THE USELESS SPAMMING OF STUPID HOSTS LETS GO PLEASE MICK BE A BAE

 

[Shattered]

No one read my comment...

This will give new users no chance, and I think people can judge companies themselves.

 

[Elcro]

No one read my comment...

This will give new users no chance, and I think people can judge companies themselves.

They sure can. But this can atleast give some kind of division line between the "Kitty Hosts" as Dot-Tech LLC says, and the hosts that are legit, and take the time to do all the proper filings.

 

[tjrgg]

Has anyone considered how much more work Mick would have to put into this? If I was the forum owner, I don't think it would be worth it.

That being said, some of you guys blow this a little out of proportion. A host doesn't technically "resell" anything. A host is selling services, not hardware, therefore, they are not reselling. For hosts that use OVH or any of these other dedicated server providers, they are leasing the hardware from them with which they can do whatever they would like (assuming it abides but some terms and conditions). This means that they can provide a service using that leased hardware. That's not exactly reselling, but I can understand why people might think that. Regardless, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that and if you don't like it, take a hike. At least, that's the way I see it.

Furthermore, something like this good easily become biased really quick. Mick could start accepting payments for hosts to become "verified". I'm not saying he would do that, but I am saying that you're putting an awful lot of trust in a guy to decide which hosts are going to be verified and which are not.

 

[Charlie]

Has anyone considered how much more work Mick would have to put into this? If I was the forum owner, I don't think it would be worth it.

That being said, some of you guys blow this a little out of proportion. A host doesn't technically "resell" anything. A host is selling services, not hardware, therefore, they are not reselling. For hosts that use OVH or any of these other dedicated server providers, they are leasing the hardware from them with which they can do whatever they would like (assuming it abides but some terms and conditions). This means that they can provide a service using that leased hardware. That's not exactly reselling, but I can understand why people might think that. Regardless, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that and if you don't like it, take a hike. At least, that's the way I see it.

Furthermore, something like this good easily become biased really quick. Mick could start accepting payments for hosts to become "verified". I'm not saying he would do that, but I am saying that you're putting an awful lot of trust in a guy to decide which hosts are going to be verified and which are not.

What about if all hosts go into the unverified section first? And then Mick just approves them? Therefore its not a case of deny/acceptance it's a case of whether the host is actually good and not just a bunch of guys who want a quick buck.

 

[tjrgg]

What about if all hosts go into the unverified section first? And then Mick just approves them? Therefore its not a case of deny/acceptance it's a case of whether the host is actually good and not just a bunch of guys who want a quick buck.

That's all based on opinion though. Not to mention it will be a case of just approving hosts because it would be more work than it's worth ensuring they all meet certain requirements and such.

We could do some sort of community vote though possibly. Put hosts into a "new hosts" section and let the community vote on the host. If they seem legit or whatever, the can go into a "verified hosts" section or whatever.

 

[tjrgg]

Yeah, maybe a automatic poll on each thread?
Although this could be abused...

How so?

 

[tjrgg]

Creating accounts, and voting Yes on the poll?
So a automatic poll on each host thread. Users vote no or yes. The thread poster can just create alternate accounts and vote on the poll?

- Not sure if the polling system is ip-based.

That would be considered multi-accounting and is against the rules. Yes, people could do it, but not without cost.

 

[Elcro]

Any comment? Mick

 

[Mick]

This does sound okay, but if I were to do this I'd need to get someone else to do it as I know very little about hosting and what makes something good or bad, so yeah..

 

[Elcro]

This does sound okay, but if I were to do this I'd need to get someone else to do it as I know very little about hosting and what makes something good or bad, so yeah..

Alrighty, well if you read above Dot-Tech LLC explained it really well.

 

[OptiBrine]

This does sound okay, but if I were to do this I'd need to get someone else to do it as I know very little about hosting and what makes something good or bad, so yeah..

I can do it, however, if you want another domain to do it, I can't pay for it :/

 

[MCHOST_David]

Best idea yet.[DOUBLEPOST=1445181526,1445181160][/DOUBLEPOST]

Bad hosting - Hosts that resell crappy OVH servers and lie about what hardware they have, have horrible support, horrible quality servers, and do not care about customers. These hosts are usually ran by money thirsty teenagers...

Good hosting - Hosts that know what they are doing. Most of them have Custom Hardware, good support, high quality servers.
Some good hosts do resell OVH, but they don't use the cheapest, crappiest servers.

Bye.

He's around the right lines. I mean, you can't call a host bad based on reselling OVH though. A verified hosts section should just be hosts that are owned by 18+ individuals, and are real business ventures. The idea of 18+ isn't because under 18s can't run a host, but that's a legal requirement (16+ to be a director in the UK and some US states actually, but until 18+ you can't really register a business bank account and so on).

Personally I'd do this:

Criteria:

• Registered company. Most countries have company lookup features. In the EU, VAT registration may be required. Ensure the company is a company, and not a summer holiday venture
• Has been trading for more than 6 months (from the date the company was registered)
• At least someone in the host's support team should have knowledge on hardware and the technical end of things, unless they're hiring a sysadmin which is perfectly fine too. Basic way to find out if a host actually has common sense
• Fake client talks on live chat for 15 minutes, sees how professionally the support staff react. Ask some dumb questions. Are they patient? Do they have good grammar? Do they get mad at you eventually? Do they quit the chat? Yes, it wastes host time, but we've had other hosts come at us. I'd rather have an official forum user pretending to be a client using our time than another host trying to find out how we run our host. And I'm sure the other host will like this, being a verified host as a result. Oh, and this encourages host to be professional, as they're not sure who's a real client and who isn't

Basic 4 bullets. Registered and professional, essentially. How the company runs, whether their website is a template or whether they use OVH is their business. Only a few points matter. Perhaps some exceptions to the registered company rule, but very, very rare exceptions.