Why can I select size 7 font for my signature when...

[Adam]

it's not allowed by the rules?

I don't understand the logic behind it. If you don't want members to use it then don't let them select it. Simple as.

Also, I don't believe violating this ridiculous rule merits a warning, if anything the moderator should just remove the offending material.

[MKR&*42]

Yeah I got told off for this a longgg time back (think I removed it before I got warned/usernoted w.e though) - why is it there if we can't use it?

[HarrySX]

lol

Edited by Bolt660 (Acting Forum Super Moderator): Please do not post pointlessly

[David]

just use it in all your posts instead

[Adam]

might just do that tbh. will piss people off just as much if not more. excellent idea david.

he also screwed up my signature and now it looks a mess. not happy.

[Chippiewill]

It's possible to do because it's impractical to prevent it.

[David]

It's possible to do because it's impractical to prevent it.

wrong size bill

[Chippiewill]

wrong size bill

Actually it was precisely the size I intended it to be for testing reasons. Thanks for the appreciation. Turns out there is a practical way to implement it.

---------- Post added 11-05-2013 at 09:02 PM ----------


Also, I don't believe violating this ridiculous rule merits a warning, if anything the moderator should just remove the offending material.
I seriously doubt moderators just doing stuff and not telling the person concerned is a sensible idea.

[Jordan]

Surely for it to be removed like it has been you must of ignored a PM about it?

[Adam]

Actually it was precisely the size I intended it to be for testing reasons. Thanks for the appreciation. Turns out there is a practical way to implement it.

---------- Post added 11-05-2013 at 09:02 PM ----------


I seriously doubt moderators just doing stuff and not telling the person concerned is a sensible idea.
along with a private message like every other rule break...............


Surely for it to be removed like it has been you must of ignored a PM about it?

YEAH of course but i replied asking a simple question and was never given an answer. good pr.

[buttons]

Hey everybody who likes tokens

[xxMATTGxx]

We can remove it from the drop-down menu but this is such a non-issue.

[Adam]

We can remove it from the drop-down menu but this is such a non-issue.
the rule is such a non rule.

[xxMATTGxx]

the rule is such a non rule.

If you just changed it yourself by reading the PM instead of your throwing your toys out of your pram we would have a much better day!

[Adam]

If you just changed it yourself by reading the PM instead of your throwing your toys out of your pram we would have a much better day!
i simply questioned why i was able to select size 7 font if it's not allowed only to be ignored.

[xxMATTGxx]

i simply questioned why i was able to select size 7 font if it's not allowed only to be ignored.

The question would have been better aimed at the FM than a Super Moderator who gave you the PM in the first place to be fair.

[Adam]

The question would have been better aimed at the FM than a Super Moderator who gave you the PM in the first place to be fair.
that's neither here nor there, he had a red name so he was important enough to be asked imo.

in any case, you obviously agree with my thread because you've changed the drop down menu. can't be that much of a non issue.

[xxMATTGxx]

It isn't an issue, I've just changed it to stop you going on about it really. You still broke the rule even if it was in the drop down menu or not and you still need to fix your signature.

[Adam]

if it was a non issue you wouldn't have changed it.


democracy baby

i don't really need to do anything, my signature was broke before broken signatures was cool.

[xxMATTGxx]

Cool story bro

[Matthew]

Your warning was because you didn't remove the size 7 text despite being asked to do so.

Yeah I probably should have replied to your question but I must've read it and completely forgot to reply... whatever. Doesn't hide the fact that you ignored me asking you to remove the text :P

[Tom]

What a pointless bit of feedback. Matt probably did remove it through annoyance and quick, witty come backs. Not really needed as well as this not being an issue.

[Adam]

Cool story bro


nice off topic post there. rule breaker.

Your warning was because you didn't remove the size 7 text despite being asked to do so.

Yeah I probably should have replied to your question but I must've read it and completely forgot to reply... whatever. Doesn't hide the fact that you ignored me asking you to remove the text :P
i was waiting for an answer because the rule defies all logic IMO.

[Matthew]

nice off topic post there. rule breaker.

i was waiting for an answer because the rule defies all logic IMO.

but nonetheless- it is a rule.

You broke the rule

In this instance, rule break = warning

so you got a warning

k

[xxMATTGxx]

nice off topic post there. rule breaker.

i was waiting for an answer because the rule defies all logic IMO.


Feel free to report the post then. You could have also re-asked the question as people can often forget to reply to PM's all the time.

[Adam]

but nonetheless- it is a rule.

You broke the rule

In this instance, rule break = warning

so you got a warning

k
gonna cry myself to sleep now. hope you're happy.


Feel free to report the post then.

:rolleyes:

[Matthew]

gonna cry myself to sleep now. hope you're happy.

yes, im ecstatic.

[Mr-Trainor]

Tbh if Adam; was waiting for a reply to a perfectly good question then I don't see how it's his fault :P. I agree that the disallowed sizes shouldn't be allowed to be selected from the drop down because that's just misleading.

[Adam]

What a pointless bit of feedback. Matt probably did remove it through annoyance and quick, witty come backs. Not really needed as well as this not being an issue.
thread isn't in feedback. this is not feedback. it is a question. hence why it is in the questions forum.

[Matthew]

Also, by the way, Adam's reply to my PM wasn't even a question (just went back and looked at it).

I'd post it but that would be breaking the rules (A)


Tbh if @Adam (http://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=35978); was waiting for a reply to a perfectly good question then I don't see how it's his fault :P. I agree that the disallowed sizes shouldn't be allowed to be selected from the drop down because that's just misleading.

wasn't a question that he asked, more like a "cbb" in all honesty

[Adam]

Also, by the way, Adam's reply to my PM wasn't even a question (just went back and looked at it).

I'd post it but that would be breaking the rules (A)



wasn't a question that he asked, more like a "cbb" in all honesty
still raised the question let's not get off on a technicality.

gee for a non issue it's really become an issue hasn't it

[Jurv]

i didn't even know you couldn't use a certain size in ur signature.. how ridic

[Chippiewill]

i didn't even know you couldn't use a certain size in ur signature.. how ridic

Most people don't want to have to scroll five miles because someone used a large font size in their signature.

[Adam]

Most people don't want to have to scroll five miles because someone used a large font size in their signature.
it was one line of font. it was 2 words.

[Jurv]

Most people don't want to have to scroll five miles because someone used a large font size in their signature.

well yh i'd understand if it was a paragraph of text but it wasn't lol

[Adam]

tbf it was also educational.

[Matthew]

tbf it was also educational.

at the very least I agree with you there :P

[Chippiewill]

it was one line of font. it was 2 words.

Can't have been very important then :)

[Adam]

Can't have been very important then :)
you'd be surprised.

[Jurv]

Can't have been very important then :)

the majority of signatures on the forum aren't important, doesn't mean people shouldn't be allowed to use them

[xxMATTGxx]

the majority of signatures on the forum aren't important, doesn't mean people shouldn't be allowed to use them

You wouldn't want to see a ton of text at font size 7 or above in signatures. Which is why it isn't allowed with anyone, regardless if it's one line or not etc. Similar reasons to why you can't have really big images or images that have a very big file size.

[Tom]

thread isn't in feedback. this is not feedback. it is a question. hence why it is in the questions forum.

My apologies: thought, idea, vent, rant, or should I say... feedback?

Thanks for the -rep, however due to this being in a more public forum I feel I should be able to post my thoughts, so I did. My "good reason" was the fact I had to get involved and get it removed. Apology accepted.

[Adam]

My apologies: thought, idea, vent, rant, or should I say... feedback?

Thanks for the -rep, however due to this being in a more public forum I feel I should be able to post my thoughts, so I did. My "good reason" was the fact I had to get involved and get it removed. Apology accepted.
it's not feedback. it's a question. how many times do i need to say this? there's a reason i didn't put it in feedback.

is that you breaking a rule by revealing reputation comment information? oh dear....

[Tom]

it's not feedback. it's a question. how many times do i need to say this? there's a reason i didn't put it in feedback.

is that you breaking a rule by revealing reputation comment information? oh dear....

Then I shall await my PM from General Management. Your thread turned more into feedback with every post you made though (I'll add here - in my opinion).

[Adam]

Then I shall await my PM from General Management. Your thread turned more into feedback with every post you made though.
i wanted a one on one chat with a member of management tbh, didn't realise other members could post in here. that's why i didn't post it in feedback as it didn't really warrant one. that enough reasoning for you?

[Tom]

i wanted a one on one chat with a member of management tbh, didn't realise other members could post in here. that's why i didn't post it in feedback as it didn't really warrant one. that enough reasoning for you?

I guess. But: "i wanted a one on one chat with a member of management tbh" -- isn't there a private messaging system for a reason? One on one chats are usually private. If you post in a thread, or speak not one on one, it automatically invites people around you into the conversation in my eyes?

[Matthew]

Adam; would you please stop trying to make whatever point you're trying to make and stop using that stupidly sized font :Ambivalent:

[Adam]

I guess. But: "i wanted a one on one chat with a member of management tbh" -- isn't there a private messaging system for a reason? One on one chats are usually private. If you post in a thread, or speak not one on one, it automatically invites people around you into the conversation in my eyes?
that would've been ideal if i knew which member of management to contact.

@Matts (http://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=60298) it is a stupidly sized font, yes, one that i shouldn't be able to use if it's annoying people that much but that's the point here... isn't it? i was warned for having two words in size 7 font (that was selectable) but posting in it for ever and a day isn't againt the rules.

admittedly, i'm being pedantic but the logic is in there somewhere.

[Tom]

that would've been ideal if i knew which member of management to contact.

@Matts (http://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=60298) it is a stupidly sized font, yes, one that i shouldn't be able to use if it's annoying people that much but that's the point here... isn't it? i was warned for having two words in size 7 font (that was selectable) but posting in it for ever and a day isn't againt the rules.

admittedly, i'm being pedantic but the logic is in there somewhere.

Well, sorry being stating a little bit of the obvious or perhaps even being a little patronising here but you're on a forum... surely you should be wise enough (judging from your posts and replies) to realise you should - perhaps - go to the manager of the forum? Failing that, even PMing a member of General Management. Either will do, I'm sure. For someone who just kind of admitted you're a little pedantic, you're not very pedant.

[Adam]

Well, sorry being stating a little bit of the obvious or perhaps even being a little patronising here but you're on a forum... surely you should be wise enough (judging from your posts and replies) to realise you should - perhaps - go to the manager of the forum? Failing that, even PMing a member of General Management. Either will do, I'm sure. For someone who just kind of admitted you're a little pedantic, you're not very pedant.
i did private message a guy with a red name and i thought that would do, it didn't as it was ignored, which is what prompted me to make a thread here.

[David]

i was warned for having two words in size 7 font (that was selectable) but posting in it for ever and a day isn't againt the rules.

that's the part that got me, pretty daft

[Tom]

i did private message a guy with a red name and i thought that would do, it didn't as it was ignored, which is what prompted me to make a thread here.

I do agree with you there, it's not wrong to do that. With that said though, one PM is never enough on Habbox. If one is ignored, you send it again. Then if that's ignored, you go to someone higher up. Then if that's ignored, you post a thread.

For someone who has been here as long as you have I thought you would know that.

[Matthew]

i did private message a guy with a red name and i thought that would do, it didn't as it was ignored, which is what prompted me to make a thread here.

your PM to me didn't really require a reply, but yeah I did forget to do so.

[Adam]

I do agree with you there, it's not wrong to do that. With that said though, one PM is never enough on Habbox. If one is ignored, you send it again. Then if that's ignored, you go to someone higher up. Then if that's ignored, you post a thread.

For someone who has been here as long as you have I thought you would know that.

the guy had a red name so i didn't believe it needed to be sent again. he already said he ignored it.


your PM to me didn't require a reply...

we've been over this, matts, it required at least a reply to tell me why it was selectable.

[Tom]

the guy had a red name so i didn't believe it needed to be sent again. he already said he ignored it.



we've been over this, matts, it required at least a reply to tell me why it was selectable.

Yet you didn't know he had ignored it at the time. Also, lime green is the higher power so somewhere you should've thought there was a need to send it again?

[Adam]

Yet you didn't know he had ignored it at the time. Also, lime green is the higher power so somewhere you should've thought there was a need to send it again?
why should i have to send a pm twice though, especially to senior staff? also, i was threatened with a 24 hour window so i thought i would get a reply at least within that time frame...

[Matthew]

why should i have to send a pm twice though, especially to senior staff? also, i was threatened with a 24 hour window so i thought i would get a reply at least within that time frame...

and so, when you didn't get a reply within 24 hours, did you not think "hey maybe I should actually do what the moderator asked me to do within 24 hours"?

My reply (or lack of) is completely irrelevant (to whether or not you remove the text)

[Adam]

and so, when you didn't get a reply within 24 hours, did you not think "hey maybe I should actually do what the moderator asked me to do within 24 hours"?

My reply (or lack of) is completely irrelevant. :p
not when what you were asking defied all logic, no. had i received an answer i would've removed it then asked the question. i thought i'd pm you first instead of making this thread...

and we're going round in circles.

[Tom]

why should i have to send a pm twice though, especially to senior staff? also, i was threatened with a 24 hour window so i thought i would get a reply at least within that time frame...

I'm not saying it's right that you didn't get a reply, but if you didn't then you should take it into someone else hands because A) they may have missed it or B) they're incapable/have too much going on. This isn't an issue about font size though, this is turning into yet another feedback thread (or question, I don't know).

[Matthew]

I'm not saying it's right that you didn't get a reply, but if you didn't then you should take it into someone else hands because A) they may have missed it or B) they're incapable/have too much going on. This isn't an issue about font size though, this is turning into yet another feedback thread (or question, I don't know).

tbh I'm not even sure what's being argued about now :P

[Adam]

I'm not saying it's right that you didn't get a reply, but if you didn't then you should take it into someone else hands because A) they may have missed it or B) they're incapable/have too much going on. This isn't an issue about font size though, this is turning into yet another feedback thread (or question, I don't know).
now it has yes, but this thread would not have been created had i received a reply. it was 24 hours, that's hardly time to pm every member of senior staff, is it?

[Matthew]

now it has yes, but this thread would not have been created had i received a reply. it was 24 hours, that's hardly time to pm every member of senior staff, is it?

Unless you were going to right a 10,000 word essay, I'd say yes it is.

[Adam]

Unless you were going to right a 10,000 word essay, I'd say yes it is.
that was the second question after, 'should i have to?'. the answer to that one is a firm no.

[Matthew]

that was the second question after, 'should i have to?'. the answer to that one is a firm no.

So because I didn't reply the rule on size 7 text suddenly didn't apply to you and therefore you didn't have to remove it?

Is that the issue?

[Jordan]

You are very annoying Adam.

You got PM'd and asked to do something by a moderator who was implementing a rule. You should of removed or reduced it whilst you was questioning the current rule on the forum rather than leave it. It's been sorted now.

[Adam]

So because I didn't reply the rule on size 7 text suddenly didn't apply to you and therefore you didn't have to remove it?

Is that the issue?

no, the rule itself is stupid, like i've said in this thread numerous times, and the fact you didn't reply is the issue. i've covered everything in this thread i'm not going round in circles.


You are very annoying Adam.

You got PM'd and asked to do something by a moderator who was implementing a rule. You should of removed or reduced it whilst you was questioning the current rule on the forum rather than leave it. It's been sorted now.
again, this thread shouldn't involve you, this thread was intended for relevant staff and if you have read the whole thread you'd know why. and yeah, you only just realised that i'm annoying? no rule against that.

[David]

Yet you didn't know he had ignored it at the time. Also, lime green is the higher power so somewhere you should've thought there was a need to send it again?

Chris; this is why we need track pms.

[Chris]

I had a reply to this earlier but the forum went down and then I went out...

Anyway, this thread is pathetic. Stop complaining over such trivial matters when you are the one in the wrong. If you have a problem then you PM me.

Thread closed.