Cautioned Member

[Calum0812]

So, if someone is wearing this badge:
http://www.habboxforum.com/images/ranks/CAUTIONED.png

What implications does that have on them? Should we be wary of them?

Thread moved here by Bolt660 (Forum Super Moderator): From 'Habbox Feedback' as its more suited here

[Samantha]

I don't think they can see certain forums like spam and stuff? I could be wrong :P.

[Jordan]

can send or receive vms, pms see certain forums like feedback and spam (not sure on the others).

[Chris]

can send or receive vms, pms see certain forums like feedback and spam (not sure on the others).

Pretty much this. It's basically a last warning for users to keep breaking the rules.

[-Nick]

Can I get one there so cool!?!?!?!?

[e5]

Yeah just means they're very close to a ban and it's a big warning for them to stay quiet for a bit :P
So, if someone is wearing this badge:
http://www.habboxforum.com/images/ranks/CAUTIONED.png

What implications does that have on them? Should we be wary of them?

Thread moved here by Bolt660 (Forum Super Moderator): From 'Habbox Feedback' as its more suited here

[MKR&*42]

On the same topic, what is one in the same style that says "Unconfirmed User" (or something similar) given out for? I haven't seen it on anybody new since I've been here, but when I've come across very old threads (4years+) I've seen it.

[Chippiewill]

It means their email is unconfirmed.

[-Nick]

Please can I have cautioned member Chris it's so cool !

[Rachel]

I have seen another fanisite doing this aswell and well some of them decided to be civilized and some just got banned because they couldn`t care less.

[MKR&*42]

It means their email is unconfirmed.

Oh right, is it still given out or not? I can't remember if you're forced to confirm your email when you sign up now.

[Rachel]

Oh right, is it still given out or not? I can't remember if you're forced to confirm your email when you sign up now.


That is a good question really. I don`t even remember if you had to confirm...but I think you did not sure.

[Chippiewill]

Oh right, is it still given out or not? I can't remember if you're forced to confirm your email when you sign up now.

Probably, I've only seen it on established users who have changed their forum email but not confirmed it yet.

[Calum0812]

I don't think I had to. Can't find a confirmation email :3

---------- Post added 29-05-2013 at 11:28 PM ----------


Probably, I've only seen it on established users who have changed their forum email but not confirmed it yet.

Only saw this after posting

[MKR&*42]

Probably, I've only seen it on established users who have changed their forum email but not confirmed it yet.

Oh right, cheers.

[Chris]

Yes you do still have to activate your account. Members who haven't activated it will have the "Newbie" usertitle.

[BreakfastBacon]

that seems like a bad thing to have but at the same time looks kinda cool lol

[Adam]

Yes they are very dangerous members, often sexual predators.

[Stephen]

The thing I don't understand is you can get cautioned for pointless posting but the punishment for it is you can't post in the main forum that doesn't increase postcount

surely a more suitable punishment for pointless posters should be only allowing them to post in forums where postcount doesn't rise

[Richie]

Yes they are very dangerous members, often sexual predators.


That explains why steo is always cautioned

[Kardan]

The thing I don't understand is you can get cautioned for pointless posting but the punishment for it is you can't post in the main forum that doesn't increase postcount

surely a more suitable punishment for pointless posters should be only allowing them to post in forums where postcount doesn't rise

This is a good point actually, I guess the thinking behind it was that back in the day, the majority of people that pointless posted spent most of their time in spam, so as punishment, they were banned from their most-used forum. I suppose it's less relevant now.

[today]

Wouldn't their posts being moderated be more effective? As they require approving obviously removing any rule breaking posts upon first defence as with it takes time to approve threads and posts thus giving the user a sense "they are not part of the community" as if there's a really interested thread and a cautioned member replies, they may have to wait up to 48 hours before their post is seen, thus they are removed from the central community.

[Adam]

Wouldn't their posts being moderated be more effective? As they require approving obviously removing any rule breaking posts upon first defence as with it takes time to approve threads and posts thus giving the user a sense "they are not part of the community" as if there's a really interested thread and a cautioned member replies, they may have to wait up to 48 hours before their post is seen, thus they are removed from the central community.
Of course it would be effected but it seems the moderation staff wouldn't take too kindly to the extra workload and in my eyes, if that's the case, then it's time for new moderation staff - staff that care about the quality and well being of the forum.

[e5]

This seems a good idea and wouldn't bother me in the slightest.

Of course it would be effected but it seems the moderation staff wouldn't take too kindly to the extra workload and in my eyes, if that's the case, then it's time for new moderation staff - staff that care about the quality and well being of the forum.

[Kardan]

Wouldn't their posts being moderated be more effective? As they require approving obviously removing any rule breaking posts upon first defence as with it takes time to approve threads and posts thus giving the user a sense "they are not part of the community" as if there's a really interested thread and a cautioned member replies, they may have to wait up to 48 hours before their post is seen, thus they are removed from the central community.


Of course it would be effected but it seems the moderation staff wouldn't take too kindly to the extra workload and in my eyes, if that's the case, then it's time for new moderation staff - staff that care about the quality and well being of the forum.

Whilst it's a good idea on paper, I can imagine why they wouldn't want to be approving Skandair's 200+ posts per day.

[Richie]

To be fair though you have to be some clown to get cautioned & not know prior to the caution that it was heading your way.. You get a **** load of warnings 'cause I remember even when I was an arse I bearly got cautioned

Has anyone actually ever got cautioned without purposely acting the bollox? If anyone did, god help ye because jesus christ that'd be a difficult task. Does anyone know what leads to a caution? like how many pms, infractions etc? If anything scrap cautions & just start throwing out weekly bans

[Kardan]

To be fair though, you have to be some clown to get cautioned & not know prior to the caution that it was heading your way.. You get a **** load of warnings 'cause I remember even when I was an arse I bearly got cautioned

Has anyone actually ever got cautioned without purposely acting the bollox? If anyone did, god help because jesus christ that'd be a difficult task. Does anyone know what leads to a caution? like how many pms, infractions etc? If anything scrap cautions & just start throwing out weekly bans

I don't know, but for some reason I always had the impression that once you got your 5th infraction you got cautioned?

And I think you're right, I don't remember anyone being cautioned that wasn't deliberately breaking the rules...

[e5]

I don't know, but for some reason I always had the impression that once you got your 5th infraction you got cautioned?

And I think you're right, I don't remember anyone being cautioned that wasn't deliberately breaking the rules...
It is pretty hard to get an infraction let alone a caution. If you break a major rule such as abusing
Mod features, then yeah it's a straight infraction. But otherwise it's a PM
Then if you offend again, a warning and then infraction. It's 4 infractions for a caution and 6 infractions for a ban.

[Kardan]

It is pretty hard to get an infraction let alone a caution. If you break a major rule such as abusing
Mod features, then yeah it's a straight infraction. But otherwise it's a PM
Then if you offend again, a warning and then infraction. It's 4 infractions for a caution and 6 infractions for a ban.

I wasn't far off with 5 then :P

And I remember back in the day I got like 3 infractions in a day for 3 pointless posts :P Times sure have changed (for the better I might add).

[today]

Of course it would be effected but it seems the moderation staff wouldn't take too kindly to the extra workload and in my eyes, if that's the case, then it's time for new moderation staff - staff that care about the quality and well being of the forum.
You've answered it yourself, if the moderators cant be bothered - get rid.


This seems a good idea and wouldn't bother me in the slightest.
Wahey!

Whilst it's a good idea on paper, I can imagine why they wouldn't want to be approving Skandair's 200+ posts per day.
It only takes a few minutes to approve 200 and odd posts or topics, it's not a hard job and it's easy.

[Kardan]

You've answered it yourself, if the moderators cant be bothered - get rid.


Wahey!

It only takes a few minutes to approve 200 and odd posts or topics, it's not a hard job and it's easy.

I can't say I know the ins-and-outs of V-Bulletin, but surely it takes more than a few minutes to read 200 posts through and presumably tick which ones should be approved? (Unless of course they're magically all acceptable messages and there's a publish-all button).

[Mr-Trainor]

I can't say I know the ins-and-outs of V-Bulletin, but surely it takes more than a few minutes to read 200 posts through and presumably tick which ones should be approved? (Unless of course they're magically all acceptable messages and there's a publish-all button).
Yeah it'd definitely take more than a few mins to go through 200 :P.

[today]

I can't say I know the ins-and-outs of V-Bulletin, but surely it takes more than a few minutes to read 200 posts through and presumably tick which ones should be approved? (Unless of course they're magically all acceptable messages and there's a publish-all button).


Yeah it'd definitely take more than a few mins to go through 200 :P.

I'm pretty sure there's a button to submit all to post. You only have to skim through, you'll clearly be able to tell which posts are obviously bad and not by basic knowledge and common sense.

[Mr-Trainor]

I'm pretty sure there's a button to submit all to post. You only have to skim through, you'll clearly be able to tell which posts are obviously bad and not by basic knowledge and common sense.
Yeah I know how it works, but again, it'll definitely take more than a few mins to go through 200 of them :P.

[xxMATTGxx]

It's possible and wouldn't be that much of a problem to make them have to get their posts approved.

[today]

Yeah I know how it works, but again, it'll definitely take more than a few mins to go through 200 of them :P.


It's possible and wouldn't be that much of a problem to make them have to get their posts approved.

Finally someone who understands how easy it is to post approve, and I can't see there being 200 or so a day requiring approval. There's always least one moderator online, let alone admin a day. And if it's set so moderators can approve posts and threads within forums they moderate, it'll take even less time.