New Rule

[The Professor]

Am I going senile, or was rule A16 (the one added today) there before? I swear I've seen some threads closed for discussing future releases because its against the fansite way.

[Elkaa]

A16 and A17 are new today. :)

[CHA!NGANG]

I think it is a good thing if you ask me :)

[MissAlice]

A16. The discussion of private Habbo Hotel material is not allowed on the forum. This includes, but is not limited to the discussion of moderation tools and staff information. If the information you are wanting to share is not avaliable to the public, then you are not able to post it on the forums.


available ;)

[-Xiangu-]

Yay new rules -.-

[The Professor]

A16. The discussion of private Habbo Hotel material is not allowed on the forum. This includes, but is not limited to the discussion of moderation tools and staff information. If the information you are wanting to share is not avaliable to the public, then you are not able to post it on the forums.


available ;)

I thought that was already a rule :P Ok, I am going senile!

[Galaxay]

Probably was when they were previously a official fansite, but removed after they lost it possibly?

[---MAD---]

I think you are referring to leaking unseen, unreleased furni. We haven't allowed that for a while but it seems people started to post leaks into Habbo mod tools etc which this rule also covers.

[The Professor]

Probably was when they were previously a official fansite, but removed after they lost it possibly?

Noooo. I just saw this rule:


A10. Don't post any information or links to information about updates or new features on Habbo Hotel that have not yet been officially introduced by Sulake - It is allowed to post about new features / updates on other hotels, but not about new things that have not been brought into the public by Sulake in any way. This is on Sulake's own request

I knew it sounded familiar!

[---MAD---]

Noooo. Catszy just made this post in the mod forums:


I knew it sounded familiar!
Yeah that links with what I posted above :P.

[The Professor]

Yeah that links with what I posted above :P.

Yeah, I was kinda busy typing it when you posted :P

[Alkaz]

Yah I dont know if there was a rule but defo an announcment.
There was an announcment thread somewere what sierk had put there a couple of years ago.

[Decode]

I dont like A16, A17 is good tho :)

[GommeInc]

So is rule A10 going to be removed/merged or are the rules going to become messy again? :P

Also, A16 suggests members cannot post news/rumours on the forum which were discussed in private by Habbo Hotel Staff. Surely that should be modified so it is allowed, but things which are not available or seen by members of the public that are not Habbo Staff, Moderators or Habbo eXperts?

[Ugawa]

I don't think they were there b4?

XX

[Catzsy]

I don't think they were there b4?

XX

Rule A16 is new so it couldn't have been. :)

[CHA!NGANG]

So is rule A10 going to be removed/merged or are the rules going to become messy again? :P

Also, A16 suggests members cannot post news/rumours on the forum which were discussed in private by Habbo Hotel Staff. Surely that should be modified so it is allowed, but things which are not available or seen by members of the public that are not Habbo Staff, Moderators or Habbo eXperts?

I am confused with that last bit lol. Whatcha mean?

[e5back2k7]

Aw :( I liked seein mod stuff etc, was very interesting. Oh well if it's breeching habbo's security or whatever, it's best to have to rule :).

[Pyroka]

I'm rather liking this rule. I mean, it will support Habbox when they go official (which most likely, they will) but also because of the idiots who feel the need to brag on about how cool they are having information nobody else knows because they've got Habbo Staff's AIM addresses.

I've already become a mean old man... at the age of 16 :P

[e5back2k7]

http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=477788

Piss taking of the new rule? :rolleyes:

[CHA!NGANG]

Yes, and Jess closed it :)

[Slowpoke]

I'm happy that people can be banned for being negative. One of the best rules that I've ever seen implemented. :)

[:....:mike:....:]

I'm happy that people can be banned for being negative. One of the best rules that I've ever seen implemented. :)
Well, good bye debates forum, good bye habbox feedback, good bye alterations forum.

Without the inability to be negative, there is no point of judging or commenting about anything anymore. If you compliment something positively all the time, you are in no way able to find out the wrong parts of something.

[Discharge Man]

Well, good bye debates forum, good bye habbox feedback, good bye alterations forum.

Without the inability to be negative, there is no point of judging or commenting about anything anymore. If you compliment something positively all the time, you are in no way able to find out the wrong parts of something.
Don't forget the web design forum - 99% of the work posted on there is utter tripe.

[CHA!NGANG]

I think whats meant is that, you can point out whats wrong, as long as you give a reason and a suggestion how to improve it, and at the same time you are not being ruud. If you just say: OMG! Habbox Sucks and that was wrong decision, then I think that is seen as negative :)

[Pyroka]

Then CHA!NGANG, seeing as I agree with what you said and that should really be what the rules states, why do they post in such cryptic messages? :rolleyes:

[today]

Then CHA!NGANG, seeing as I agree with what you said and that should really be what the rules states, why do they post in such cryptic messages? :rolleyes:
to go "look u broke this rule even though its not clear, you did."

[Catzsy]

I'm happy that people can be banned for being negative. One of the best rules that I've ever seen implemented. :)

It actually says 'negative factor'. It also says contructive criticism which can be both positive and negative. My guess is that this would only apply if somebody was constantly negative without being at all constructive with what they were saying. :)

[Pyroka]

It actually says 'negative factor'. It also says contructive criticism which can be both positive and negative. My guess is that this would only apply if somebody was constantly negative without being at all constructive with what they were saying. :)

Then, why isn't that in the rules. God, these new rules sound really bland and unspecific...

[jrh2002]

A16: Was this not there before? I think something similar was and then it got removed? I know HX removed alot of rules when they lost official and think that was better than being told wht could and could not be said by habbo.
Habbo do not support scripting in any form so will you ban any scripting info/news from HxF? Have the talk of retros been removed? pictures of scripted rooms?

A17: Good for people who are negative about everything but I think its unfair on people who are negative about certain topics and positive about others and think this is just a good excuse to ban people :s you might aswell ban them and put the reason as you do not like them which under HxF T&C's you are entitled to do. I would sooner be told the truth instead of somebody searching my threads/posts looking for an excuse just to dispose of me.
If we cant have a negative argument the threads wont last long will they?

[---MAD---]

Then, why isn't that in the rules. God, these new rules sound really bland and unspecific...
I have edited it slighty by putting the word "constantly" in it. Is that clearer?

[Pyroka]

Definetly. :P Cheers.

[The Professor]

Personally I think its a sad case of affairs that it's had to become a rule. Its a shame people couldn't take the message when sierk posted that announcement about being overly negative, or the thread closures, or constant warnings.

[Catzsy]

Personally I think its a sad case of affairs that it's had to become a rule. Its a shame people couldn't take the message when sierk posted that announcement about being overly negative, or the thread closures, or constant warnings.

Well if its a rule Alex, everybody knows where they stand and everyone knows the consequences of breaking rules. To be banned when there isn't a rule about it is pretty confusing as well, I think.

[---MAD---]

Well if its a rule Alex, everybody knows where they stand and everyone knows the consequences of breaking rules. To be banned when there isn't a rule about it is pretty confusing as well, I think.
But I think the rule itself is also obvious. Imagine someone letting you in their house for a big party for example, you go in and start criticizing everything, how the party is set up, how the house looks, where everything is, how the party host is controlling everything. Obviously you will get the boot as everyone else won't be enjoying themselves as much and you will just be annoying the host and everyone who is trying hard to make the party fun and a success.

[DaveTaylor]

I praise the new rules, well A17 16 doesn't affect me really.

[shizzle]

I praise the new rules, well A17 16 doesn't affect me really.
Nor does it affect me.

[AgnesIO]

Was A17 inputted because of Undertakers goings on.

[The Professor]

But I think the rule itself is also obvious. Imagine someone letting you in their house for a big party for example, you go in and start criticizing everything, how the party is set up, how the house looks, where everything is, how the party host is controlling everything. Obviously you will get the boot as everyone else won't be enjoying themselves as much and you will just be annoying the host and everyone who is trying hard to make the party fun and a success.

That's what I was getting at Rosie :) It should really go without saying, but people take it too far. That's probably how most habbox rules came about, the bullying infraction and the foreign languages rule spring to mind.


I praise the new rules, well A17 16 doesn't affect me really.

Agreed, I think it was definately needed.

[shizzle]

Was A17 inputted because of Undertakers goings on.


That's what I was getting at Rosie :) It should really go without saying, but people take it too far. That's probably how most habbox rules came about, the bullying infraction and the foreign languages rule spring to mind.



Agreed, I think it was definately needed.

I agree with both of you.

[GommeInc]

Banning negativity destroys opinion, and the whole point of a forum. So a rule against negativity is as stupid as crustless bread.

Also, if people are constantly negative about Habbox, I am sure that indicates something is wrong which should have a look into. People are only negative when they've got a negative outcome forced upon them e.g. not replying to threads with an idea OR an odd change in a system which wasn't called for.

[jrh2002]

A16. The discussion of private Habbo Hotel material is not allowed on the forum. This includes, but is not limited to the discussion of moderation tools and staff information. If the information you are wanting to share is not avaliable to the public, then you are not able to post it on the forums.


Has this rule been introduced now because Habbo have contacted you saying you have been voted official again? But to be on the list you need to do X Y and Z. Thats how they used to work when offering sites the chance to be on the official list.

[today]

Has this rule been introduced now because Habbo have contacted you saying you have been voted official again? But to be on the list you need to do X Y and Z. Thats how they used to work when offering sites the chance to be on the official list.
Now you say that, it could be..

[jrh2002]

Now you say that, it could be..

It seemed a strange rule to add out of the blue and thats the only reason I could think of. Unless they have been told they will be considered next time if they sort the place out a little.

[The Professor]

It seemed a strange rule to add out of the blue and thats the only reason I could think of. Unless they have been told they will be considered next time if they sort the place out a little.

Well considering we're currently on a campaign to become official, it kinda makes sense :P

[today]

It seemed a strange rule to add out of the blue and thats the only reason I could think of. Unless they have been told they will be considered next time if they sort the place out a little.
I always thought the forum wouldnt matter as well its a different domain ;S

But i do agree its a strange rule to add without any real reason next thing we know you cant discuss retros!

[Slowpoke]

I always thought the forum wouldnt matter as well its a different domain ;S

But i do agree its a strange rule to add without any real reason next thing we know you cant discuss retros!

The forum is still apart of Habbox and visitors are bound to check it out.

[Lycan]

Hmmm

Is this forum not already moderated to death, luckily this rule won't affect me

[jrh2002]

Well considering we're currently on a campaign to become official, it kinda makes sense :P

Yes it would make sense if the campaign to be official started today and not god knows how long ago :rolleyes: talk about shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.

[The Professor]

I always thought the forum wouldnt matter as well its a different domain ;S

But i do agree its a strange rule to add without any real reason next thing we know you cant discuss retros!

Its still the same site, Sulake aren't going to let it slide on a technicality.


Yes it would make sense if the campaign to be official started today and not god knows how long ago :rolleyes: talk about shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.

Yeah I agree, but better late than never :D

[jrh2002]

Yeah I agree, but better late than never :D

Lets see if management comment ;)

Not sure when the update was added to the article.



UnOfficial Fansite Poll Update
Congratulations to ClubHabbo.net and Habbox.com who have successfully progressed to the next round. The poll was very close, but these two sites have edged out our other three competitors and will advance to the decision table. They will be competing against HabboHut.com and Habbo.net.

We will announce the final decision later this week.


http://www.habbo.co.uk/community/fansites

Could this be a well done habbox? It should never have been removed the first time.

[today]

Lets see if management comment ;)

Not sure when the update was added to the article.



http://www.habbo.co.uk/community/fansites

Could this be a well done habbox? It should never have been removed the first time.
They should both get it as Habbo.net is no longer official = space open anyway so one will take its place, then as its meant to be out of them two the other one will lose it as its crap.

thus both should really get it..

[Elkaa]

Interesting posts in responce to the new rule. ;)

[Titch]

Interesting posts in responce to the new rule. ;)

i like the way no management respond to jh comments about habbo contacting for offical, they just show a little wink. :)

[GommeInc]

I still think rule A10 and rule A16 are the same rules... Both cover roughly the same grounds, they just need combining otherwise all that hardwork of cleaning up the rules has gone down the pan, yet again.

[The Professor]

I still think rule A10 and rule A16 are the same rules... Both cover roughly the same grounds, they just need combining otherwise all that hardwork of cleaning up the rules has gone down the pan, yet again.

I think that makes sense, I tried to find some other rules that could be merged in similar fasion but Elkaa seems to have done a fair job of tidying them up :P