I came up with the idea to add Vote 4 because it was a popular site that adds 20-30 users to the active playercount. Just because it glitches doesn't mean we should remove it. Same with Vote 2. We should just tell them to fix their vote rewards rather than remove them altogether.

 

That's a lot more expensive - I think Jamie and Andrew probably prefer the current situation, and I do, too. minecraftforum.net is a HUGE website, and removing it would be a big step back for ECC.

 

Namely @JamieSinn, @Nicit6, and @andrewkm. :p

 

Vote 4 works fine for me and many other players, and removing it isn't a well thought choice, at all. All this will do is decrease the number of players who join the server.

If anything, we should be adding more voting sites. Adding PMC as vote 5 would be a step in the right direction.

 

He's suggesting to replace it, not just remove it. Though I absolutely agree with you.

 

vote 4 is fine -1 the site gets a lot of users all vote sites intermittently work its how it is

 

I know and it essentially has the same effect - You're literally removing a voting site that has potentially gained hundreds of new, different players.

 

Please stop tagging us

 

Apologies, I will.

 

Vote 4 isn't about giving you a netherstar, it s about promoting the server on curse's server list, and incentivizing you to vote. We are a steady 5 on the list of servers there which is good promotion.

It's an awful experience though - it seems to load endless advertising stuff which means that it can take 5 minutes or so to load. I've found if I don't wait until all the rubbish has loaded it won't let me vote and counts it as a vote meaning I have to wait another 24 hours.

 

Voting sites aren't about whether they can effectively give netherstars.

If there are issues with a site you should report it to them. The first 3 vote sites all have a contact link at the bottom of the page and the 4th has a "help" button at the bottom.