Rule

[beau03]

A11. Do not name anybody for hacking, scripting, trashing or any other bad things

Should be gone, eeryone trys and help others too be safe, and they get infracted. Please, what do you suggest? It's not fair that we get infracted for doing something too hep others.

[Liam!]

you could be doing it to make the person look bad..

[VPSwow]

I supose if they changed it so you needed valid proof like vid or screenshot but then people could edit the screenshots or do the video on a retro. So it probly wouldnt work.

[beau03]

:O! They need to change the rule abit.

[Aflux]

you could be doing it to make the person look bad..
Exactly.

Any evidence that you submit that looks valid may not be, any image/video could be edited and therefore the person in question been giving a bad name wrongly.

It's not at Habbox's liberty to decide if a member is safe or not, it's your own judgement.

[dannyisnotamazing]

It's a lame rule in one way but not in other ways.
It is lame when you need to tell people that they are unsafe etc but people could also just use it to blame people when they didn't.

[Bomb-Head]

The rule is in place to avoid innocent people being accused of scamming when they might not have done it, although I can see your point. I think it's fine as it is though.

[Stephen!]

People can easily PM the person who is making the claim for the name of the person.

[sierk1]

I think what we will try to do is make a list in the forum, that is updated by moderators, of forum members that have been accused of something. This list will contain besides the name of the accused person also the name of the person(s) that accused him/her, and also some information like a link to a thread about the trade.
Of course it is possible that members on the list have been falsely accused, but that is for people themself to decide.
This way we prevent a lot of arguing in different threads, but people can still see which members have been accused of something in the past and by who.

This is just an idea, we will have to see how it works out.

[Vause]

yeah, i got a warning because of this, when i was just warning others about it.

i like sierk's idea.

[reindeer.]

wouldnt you rather have people not getting scammed than people not being called/judged to be scammers?

[Byble]

You Could Be Faking It.

[sierk1]

You have to realise that there is no way we can stop people from getting scammed, this is still their own responsibility. Even if we would allow people to name whoever scammed them, these members will just create a new account.


wouldnt you rather have people not getting scammed than people not being called/judged to be scammers?

[le harry]

You should be able to PM a high staff / smod with enough proof to add them to a bad traders list :S

[beau03]

The rule should say:

No accusing people of hacking, scamming, or scripting without enough proof to support what you are saying.

[GommeInc]

The rule is fine I think. If people name someone for scamming, then it could be to make others look bad and you don't have the person who scammed's opinion or side of the story. Besides if you get scammed/hacked you probably should be less careless anyway.

[nvrspk4]

The rule should say:

No accusing people of hacking, scamming, or scripting without enough proof to support what you are saying.

What is "enough" ? Then that becomes ambiguous, then the mods decide that the proof is not "enough" and of course if there is any proof at all the member will say its "enough" so its one idea against the next.

In my opinion, I think the rule should stay, because removal or even editing would be too easily abused.

However, it is very easy for you to simply PM the member they were going to trade with and inform them that you have been scammed by the person they are going to trade with. If they get enough PMs, or maybe even one, it will alert them. The counteraction to this is that if they get one or two PMs, but 5 people post saying the other person is trusted, they can see that it may be a personal grudge.