Guardian System

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

22-07-2012, 03:11 PM
Abdicators

Quote:

Originally Posted by iBlueBox

Think it should also be brought in the amount of times one person has been banned on that account.

I think it will be. They checked this with Hobbas (you was allowed to be banned a maximum of three times to be considered); but I think they are now going to check total bans across your id.
22-07-2012, 03:15 PM
MKR&*42

If it is based on bans, unfortunate for those who've endured false bans in the past 2 years haha.

IT IMMEDIATELY EXCLUDES ME BECAUSE OF MY 50+ Bans. (Not to mention how many are for sexual :)). I guarantee @McDonalds; has had more than me though haha.
22-07-2012, 03:44 PM
geo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Intersocial

If it is based on bans, unfortunate for those who've endured false bans in the past 2 years haha.

IT IMMEDIATELY EXCLUDES ME BECAUSE OF MY 50+ Bans. (Not to mention how many are for sexual :)). I guarantee @McDonalds; has had more than me though haha.

I've had so many bans. Usually if I get banned on McDonalds I would moan at mods and then get banned on all my other clones haha. :P But not recently, I've been really good. I think I've just had two 1 hour mutes. :P
22-07-2012, 03:45 PM
MKR&*42

Quote:

Originally Posted by McDonalds

I've had so many bans. Usually if I get banned on McDonalds I would moan at mods and then get banned on all my other clones haha. :P But not recently, I've been really good. I think I've just had two 1 hour mutes. :P

My last ban was months ago as well haha ;) only cause I stopped playing LMAO. I think they just have a hard time telling the difference between sexual jokes and full on sexual activity haha.

AND ALSO, I WAS UNDERWATER ONCE SAYING "SUCKS MY SNORKEL" AND THEY THOUGHT I MEANT... YEAH... AND BANNED ME :(. I was genuinely in water omg.
22-07-2012, 04:37 PM
Agesilaus

I agree with an age limit to stuff like this. There are ways they can properly have it verified. It's good if they decide to do that. If they are going to take bans into consideration when reviewing an account to see if they are right to become a Guardian, they should at least double check to see if they are legitimant before saying yes or no. They should also not accept people who have too many bans or get banned all of the time or have been banned recently, providing the bans are fair.

There is so much they should do in order to help keep the system as clean as possible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shorty

Habbo have a test hotel where the system could already be fully implemented, however in public builds it's only just being introduced.

That makes sense. =]
22-07-2012, 05:11 PM
iBlueBox

Quote:

Originally Posted by LucasAge

I agree with an age limit to stuff like this. There are ways they can properly have it verified. It's good if they decide to do that. If they are going to take bans into consideration when reviewing an account to see if they are right to become a Guardian, they should at least double check to see if they are legitimant before saying yes or no. They should also not accept people who have too many bans or get banned all of the time or have been banned recently, providing the bans are fair.

There is so much they should do in order to help keep the system as clean as possible.

That makes sense. =]

I agree that you should have to be a certain age.

But how exactly would that be proving? I mean the Hobba program shown that people still lied about the ages.
Very hard to prove over the internet,

Unless habbo would want a scan of your ID.
22-07-2012, 05:19 PM
santa-my-nana

Quote:

Originally Posted by Okeanos

meeting some lame criteria should not entitle you to become a guardian (if it even happens, which is doubtful). in my opinion, only people who pass a strict criteria (including proving you're 18+) should enable you to apply, but whether you become one or not is down to a personal written application.

I would just like to pick up on this point from earlier on. Why should staff members/Guardians be 18+, Whats wrong with 16+. If by law at 16 you can work and get paid for it. If its a question of maturity there is a lot of young site owners out there who are very mature and begin the site at a young age. Say you had just met someone, they impressed you and you did not know what age they were, if you turned them away because of there age it would be discriminatory, habbo has already been attacked once, I don't think they want it again but for discrimination
22-07-2012, 06:07 PM
Tidings

looks interesting, they way we have to review the moderators.. like they cant do their job properly.. :')
22-07-2012, 06:16 PM
Okeanos

Quote:

Originally Posted by iBlueBox

But how exactly would that be proving? I mean the Hobba program shown that people still lied about the ages.
Very hard to prove over the internet,

A CRB check would prove someone's age and make sure they're not a creepy perv at the same time. But maybe that's a bit too ott. I don't recall any UK hobbas who lied about their age, certainly not any gold/super hobbas.

Quote:

Originally Posted by santa-my-nana

I would just like to pick up on this point from earlier on. Why should staff members/Guardians be 18+, Whats wrong with 16+. If by law at 16 you can work and get paid for it. If its a question of maturity there is a lot of young site owners out there who are very mature and begin the site at a young age. Say you had just met someone, they impressed you and you did not know what age they were, if you turned them away because of there age it would be discriminatory, habbo has already been attacked once, I don't think they want it again but for discrimination

I'd prefer it to be 21+ because 18 year olds are hardly better than 16 but that will never happen. Obviously people under 18 will disagree but in general they're too petty and silly to be trusted with a position of responsibility. There are exceptions of course, but you have to draw the line somewhere. That said, for all we know guardians might be little better than habbo Xs in which case a minimum age limit wouldnt be needed.
22-07-2012, 06:21 PM
MKR&*42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Okeanos

I'd prefer it to be 21+ because 18 year olds are hardly better than 16 but that will never happen. Obviously people under 18 will disagree but in general they're too petty and silly to be trusted with a position of responsibility. There are exceptions of course, but you have to draw the line somewhere. That said, for all we know guardians might be little better than habbo Xs in which case an age limit wouldnt be needed.

Oh. Hmm, why did I quote you. Oh yes I know why haha.

I completely agree with all of that^. Although there are a minority of 16 year olds who do behave maturely and can uphold a high standard of responsibility, the overall stance is that the large % of them aren't responsible or mentally mature enough to deal with moderating a large community. The UN (I believe it's UN Law, not sure) considers people "adults" at 18 for a very good reason, because that's the average age most people... in a sense "mature" and I don't think a few minorities should bring the limit down to 16.

I wouldn't go as far to make it 21+, I'd say 19+. In the US/CA/AU maybe idk, and idk about SG you will be out of school by the time you're 19. I'd rather not see 16/17/18 year olds throw away their education because they're too busy moderating a virtual community.
22-07-2012, 06:37 PM
santa-my-nana

Quote:

Originally Posted by Intersocial

Oh. Hmm, why did I quote you. Oh yes I know why haha.

I completely agree with all of that^. Although there are a minority of 16 year olds who do behave maturely and can uphold a high standard of responsibility, the overall stance is that the large % of them aren't responsible or mentally mature enough to deal with moderating a large community. The UN (I believe it's UN Law, not sure) considers people "adults" at 18 for a very good reason, because that's the average age most people... in a sense "mature" and I don't think a few minorities should bring the limit down to 16.

I wouldn't go as far to make it 21+, I'd say 19+. In the US/CA/AU maybe idk, and idk about SG you will be out of school by the time you're 19. I'd rather not see 16/17/18 year olds throw away their education because they're too busy moderating a virtual community.

I have to agree that there is a minority of people who are 16 and are mature,I see your point about throwing away education but when i go to college in September I will be studying creative media, acting and buisness studies, now i'm going to be while creating my own site (Part of the creative media and buisness studies curriculum) but also part is moderation, so some people may be throwing there education away but some maybe trying to gain one, This sort of stuff should not be determined by age otherwise you are denying those who are mature enough and some who are more mature than some other older users a CHANCE. Lifes about own choices, if someone does not want an education, maybe because its not right for them, should they not be aloud this chance to go for it who feels better suited in a virtual environment or someone like myself who is wanting a chance because of my education. My question is it fair. I think if it did require an age limit you might as well require a formal application process just like any job and a CV, I think a CV speaks for a person a long with a personal statement and record of achievement, this can show you what a person is like a long with how they present them selves.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Okeanos

A CRB check would prove someone's age and make sure they're not a creepy perv at the same time. But maybe that's a bit too ott. I don't recall any UK hobbas who lied about their age, certainly not any gold/super hobbas.

I'd prefer it to be 21+ because 18 year olds are hardly better than 16 but that will never happen. Obviously people under 18 will disagree but in general they're too petty and silly to be trusted with a position of responsibility. There are exceptions of course, but you have to draw the line somewhere. That said, for all we know guardians might be little better than habbo Xs in which case a minimum age limit wouldnt be needed.

I would say 21+ is a bit hefty, read above what I just said as it links to the majority of this. This last week I have been on a trip with many young people around the country and im living with them again this week, and we are doing community projects in our area, you would not believe how many of them are so mature and they are all under 18, the first week we were doing team building exercisers but this week we are doing the more creative side and building our community project for the good of our community, if you got turned away and you knew you were a really good moderator who was really mature but they didnt know about any of the stuff you done, How would you feel?
22-07-2012, 11:53 PM
Bill

I cannot see there being an age limit on the Guardians. I could be wrong but I don't think guardians will have to provide any identification and I also do not believe there will be a numerical limit on how many there will be. I think a lot of people are going to be very disappointed.
23-07-2012, 12:13 AM
GommeInc

I've sure that goes against a privacy policy somewhere, to allow snitches to go through private conversations to check for bullying. It seems like a system that could be abused and again derails the whole point of the original problem with Habbo, that those paid to do their jobs simply get away with being unaccountable again.
23-07-2012, 01:08 AM
Kardan

Giving Habbos power with minimal staff supervision means some Habbos will abuse their privileges.

Although the on/off duty thing is handy, would've been nice to have had that in the eXperts program - would turn override on and off aswell :)
23-07-2012, 01:10 AM
Abdicators

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill

I cannot see there being an age limit on the Guardians. I could be wrong but I don't think guardians will have to provide any identification and I also do not believe there will be a numerical limit on how many there will be. I think a lot of people are going to be very disappointed.

This. I also think some of you are a little too worried about this age thing, Guardians are not going to have the power to review room chat logs, as far as i'm aware the only power they are going to have is to mute, kick and room ban users in the room they have been called too. Any actions they make will have to be based on what they see in the room once they get there.
23-07-2012, 05:12 AM
LiquidLuck.

Seems pretty cool and I can't wait for the free chat to be back.
23-07-2012, 02:03 PM
atpeak

I think people are getting way too carried away. Hobbas will never be back like pre 05 because of security and legal reasons. Hobbas were the main moderators of the hotel whilst a staff member would supervise them 24/7. This new Guardian system is a gimmick like the Habbo X team who were pretty much pants, laughed at and most didn't even care about them (nor did the staff), sorry but I'm being brutally honest here.

Hobbas were widely respected by 90% of the community on Habbo (excluding the noob 10%). Their presence in a room would change peoples behavior etc whilst they sat idle with their Gold Hobba badge.

They had powers, real powers: Kick, Room Kick, Ban and Alert, Room override, chatlogs as standard for Gold.

Habbo X's had room override and a badge that meant nothing to others.

Oh yeah who remembers scambusters?
23-07-2012, 03:49 PM
Bob1

Sounds like a fairly new take on a very familiar system, I'm intrigued I'll give them that. Personally I still don't think it sounds effective at the moment and can still see obvious problems/old mistakes being remade but wouldn't like to assume based on the small snippets of info.

Quote:

Originally Posted by atpeak

Oh yeah who remembers scambusters?

LOL...
23-07-2012, 07:20 PM
TonyBest

Like some people here said the system may be abused slightly, but it is looking like it might be good.
26-07-2012, 10:58 AM
Shorty

Everything is starting to take more shape!

http://i.imgur.com/XSU1K.png
26-07-2012, 11:03 AM
Abdicators

Shorty cheats in races. so here is another one of the screens that he missed to try and beat me. >: (

http://screensnapr.com/e/Pz6txr.jpg
26-07-2012, 11:09 AM
Shorty

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abdicators

Shorty cheats in races. so here is another one of the screens that he missed to try and beat me. >: (

http://screensnapr.com/e/Pz6txr.jpg

Haha :3

New Page:
http://i.imgur.com/XSU1K.png
26-07-2012, 11:15 AM
Jarkie

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shorty

Everything is starting to take more shape!

http://i.imgur.com/XSU1K.png

Looking rather odd.. :S
26-07-2012, 11:20 AM
Shorty

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarkie

Looking rather odd.. :S

http://i.imgur.com/878zW.png

1. You as a Guardian get a request.
2. You review the guide, it will display everything the guide said.
3. Votes are gathered from other Guardians
4. The votes are added together and a conclusion made.
26-07-2012, 11:22 AM
Jarkie

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shorty

http://i.imgur.com/878zW.png

1. You as a Guardian get a request.
2. You review the guide, it will display everything the guide said.
3. Votes are gathered from other Guardians
4. The votes are added together and a conclusion made.

Oh I see, Seems a little clearer, can't wait to have a play with it tbh! Roll on next week :)
26-07-2012, 05:47 PM
Bob1

So the new Guardian system is essentially like... Big Brother.... ? Yeh, in my earlier post when I said I'd reserve judgement, I take that back. This seems hideous.
26-07-2012, 07:48 PM
atpeak

What are they voting on? I don't get it
26-07-2012, 08:02 PM
Agesilaus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Okeanos

A CRB check would prove someone's age and make sure they're not a creepy perv at the same time. But maybe that's a bit too ott. I don't recall any UK hobbas who lied about their age, certainly not any gold/super hobbas.

I have to agree there. They must have done some sort of verification back in the day, a part from Habbo account record, because I would say all of the Hobbas I knew about definitely were over 18, I did hear some rumour about under age Hobbas, but it was very small and I dont even know if it was true! That's on the UK hotel anyway. But, any costs involved in getting a person vetted for this should pay back the money ten fold for helping to maintain the quality of a well intentioned system that helps a product.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Okeanos

I'd prefer it to be 21+ because 18 year olds are hardly better than 16 but that will never happen. Obviously people under 18 will disagree but in general they're too petty and silly to be trusted with a position of responsibility. There are exceptions of course, but you have to draw the line somewhere. That said, for all we know guardians might be little better than habbo Xs in which case a minimum age limit wouldnt be needed.

Definitely agreeable there. 18 is not a bad age really when you look at it. You should have some sense of responsibility, coming out of school, going into uni and getting a job by that stage.

I would have to say that Guardians will be much better than Xs, given that they will have tools to help people. My only hope is that people will use the tools for the right reasons and to do good for Habbo. That's why it is important for the developers to have a system in place to filter out trolls and only let people in with a good sense of maturity, so we can get the best out of the system.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill

I cannot see there being an age limit on the Guardians. I could be wrong but I don't think guardians will have to provide any identification and I also do not believe there will be a numerical limit on how many there will be. I think a lot of people are going to be very disappointed.

I fear this will be the truth.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GommeInc

I've sure that goes against a privacy policy somewhere, to allow snitches to go through private conversations to check for bullying. It seems like a system that could be abused and again derails the whole point of the original problem with Habbo, that those paid to do their jobs simply get away with being unaccountable again.

I get the feeling that Guardians will NOT be able to see who is saying what, rather than a mask to distinguish between the victims and the bullies. I don’t think we will get to see who says what in the situation. That’s the impression I’m getting with some of these screenshots anyway.

Giving Habbos power with minimal staff supervision means some Habbos will abuse their privileges.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kardan

Giving Habbos power with minimal staff supervision means some Habbos will abuse their privileges.

I absolutely agree! There needs to be a staff member, watching the system, reading feedbacks given, and chatlogs to determine abuse and take action on those that are misbehaving!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abdicators

This. I also think some of you are a little too worried about this age thing, Guardians are not going to have the power to review room chat logs, as far as i'm aware the only power they are going to have is to mute, kick and room ban users in the room they have been called too. Any actions they make will have to be based on what they see in the room once they get there.

That is going to make it exceedingly difficult to review bullying cases. I do not think this will be. However I could be wrong, but I want to point out that people usually report bullying ‘after’ someone has done something rather than before. They can set up a chat log system for this and mask the real name of all involved in the log, so we can provide a proper verdict.

Quote:

Originally Posted by atpeak

I think people are getting way too carried away. Hobbas will never be back like pre 05 because of security and legal reasons. Hobbas were the main moderators of the hotel whilst a staff member would supervise them 24/7. This new Guardian system is a gimmick like the Habbo X team who were pretty much pants, laughed at and most didn't even care about them (nor did the staff), sorry but I'm being brutally honest here.

I agree with everything you have said with your post, but this part. Guardians are marked as the modernised Hobbas, making a return. So Paul says anyway. This is how I see it:

Hobbas had tool to help people.
Habbo Xs had no tools to help people.
Guardians will have tools to help people.

Guardians will be more like Hobbas if anything, not Habbo Xs.

Also:

Quote:

Originally Posted by atpeak

Oh yeah who remembers scambusters?

I was very new when they had the old Habbo site. Can someone explain what scambusters actually was, how it worked? Wasn’t it staff operated? I’m hearing all this stuff about how they had Habbos in it.

All I remember about it was you reported a scam and got no reply what so ever. God knows if anything happened at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shorty

Everything is starting to take more shape!

http://i.imgur.com/XSU1K.png

Btw, Shorty and Abdicators, you have made some very interesting screenshots. How are you getting these? I’m sorry if you have answered this already, I may have missed it somewhere. :P

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob1

So the new Guardian system is essentially like... Big Brother.... ? Yeh, in my earlier post when I said I'd reserve judgement, I take that back. This seems hideous.

LOL big brother. How did you come to that? Did the images remind you?
26-07-2012, 08:04 PM
Kyle

So if enough guardians vote you badly they can basically get you banned/muted? wat.
26-07-2012, 08:08 PM
Jarkie

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kyle

So if enough guardians vote you badly they can basically get you banned/muted? wat.

Seems that way lol :/
26-07-2012, 08:12 PM
Agesilaus

We don't know at this stage what happens after we vote. Something might happen to the Habbo. It may just get sent to the moderator for review. We don't know. We have to wait a bit longer for the answers for that one. That's best. =]
26-07-2012, 08:35 PM
atpeak

@LucasAge

I was quite new aswell when scam busters was getting removed. But I heard that some trusted Habbo's (including some Hobbas) could log into a system (not sure if it was house keeping) and check a Habbo's trading and furni records and determine scammers and bust them lol. They then would return the furni using a tool to take the furni off the scammer and give it back to the rightful owner and then ban the scammer.

---------- Post added 26-07-2012 at 09:38 PM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by LucasAge

We don't know at this stage what happens after we vote. Something might happen to the Habbo. It may just get sent to the moderator for review. We don't know. We have to wait a bit longer for the answers for that one. That's best. =]

Replying to the quote. On the Habbo blog it says that guardians will have some low level powers to solve situations. Only Moderators and Staff will continue to have the exclusive remedial tools.

So the only tool I see that is "non-remedial" is Kick and Mute? :/

Also I don't think US laws allow for other habbos to see chat logs hence why the US hotel never really had hobbas. Thjs means that Guardians won't be allowed to ban habbos i would think

The only reason he named them "modernized Hobbas" is just a fad because the media is scutinizing everything and on the unmute website there was a huge demand for Hobbas to come back. The guardian system has nothing to do with the Hobbas and it was planned way before Ch4 and media got involved. He just renamed it hobba to make it look like hes listening.
26-07-2012, 09:12 PM
Agesilaus

Quote:

Originally Posted by atpeak

Also I don't think US laws allow for other habbos to see chat logs hence why the US hotel never really had hobbas. Thjs means that Guardians won't be allowed to ban habbos i would think.

I don't think that's the case. Moderators have Habbo accounts, should that mean they dont get to see chat logs? No, I think it is much more involved. If there is a law. I don't know anything about the laws regarding people reading chat logs in the U.S, a lot of this stuff about U.S law doesn't match up right. It would be good to see the actual written legislation from an official source.

Quote:

Originally Posted by atpeak

The only reason he named them "modernized Hobbas" is just a fad because the media is scutinizing everything and on the unmute website there was a huge demand for Hobbas to come back. The guardian system has nothing to do with the Hobbas and it was planned way before Ch4 and media got involved. He just renamed it hobba to make it look like hes listening.

Actually, Paul said they were modernised Hobbas before the mute happened. And if you look at it, it is closer to Hobbas than anything else we have had. None of the other programs have allowed others to moderate a player. I also don't see any problem with Paul saying it is a modernised version of Hobbas anyway. From what we are seeing and hearing, it is in a lot of ways.
26-07-2012, 09:58 PM
Bob1

Quote:

Originally Posted by LucasAge

I have to agree there. They must have done some sort of verification back in the day, a part from Habbo account record, because I would say all of the Hobbas I knew about definitely were over 18, I did hear some rumour about under age Hobbas, but it was very small and I don’t even know if it was true!

Yep, all Hobbas on all hotels (other than the alternate US system) underwent checks (same as all MODs did), for the UK it was a bog standard CRB. These were initially not always carried out through the London Office and that is where one, possibly two of the rumoured underage Hobbas sprang from, they were fairly quickly uncovered in each case I remember. After a point the office took more responsibility for apply for the CRB checks themselves rather than leaving it to the applicants (some would say that was just common sense but you know Sulake..) Currently with the outsourcing of moderation to Spanish call centre workers I'm not sure even the MODs are background checked so it's highly doubtful Guardians will need anything though I agree to be in a position with access to tools containing potentially sensitive information (whether names are included or not) you should submit to a check. I highlight an article about Facebook moderation to draw attention to the point I’m making here and below -

http://gawker.com/5885714/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolog...-Facebook.html

I know the issues faced by Habbo moderators may be less violent in content but I imagine Sulake outsourcing as they do have a very similar issue, just no one has uncovered it yet. I kinda think the Gawker post highlights the issue of interpretation too which leads me to..

Quote:

Originally Posted by LucasAge

LOL big brother. How did you come to that? Did the images remind you?

The images are a bit aint they. In the sense that an audience will be watching a submitted conversation and voting as to whether you face "eviction" depending how they view your behaviour, personally, based on their own personal beliefs and views, as with the TV show people have different opinions. No matter what you say in life your opinions are affected by who you are so people will all see different circumstances differently, with Hobbas there were clear guidelines with Guardians I can see the vote system being very problematic, a vote system implies blurred boundaries open to interpretation.

US law does my head in, I'm sure it's not much more complicated than UK law but it gives me brain ache so I gave up trying to find issues, lol I knew there was one with the old Hobba system and it was to do with access to user data & it was explained by someone in one of the old "MUTE" or "GUARDIANS ANNOUNCED NOW" threads (or something like that) if someone wants to dredge it up

I'll go ahead and get down off my soapbox now lol...(this is why I stopped working in moderation before someone stoned me for ranting too much)
26-07-2012, 11:39 PM
Agesilaus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob1

The images are a bit aint they. In the sense that an audience will be watching a submitted conversation and voting as to whether you face "eviction" depending how they view your behaviour, personally, based on their own personal beliefs and views, as with the TV show people have different opinions. No matter what you say in life your opinions are affected by who you are so people will all see different circumstances differently, with Hobbas there were clear guidelines with Guardians I can see the vote system being very problematic, a vote system implies blurred boundaries open to interpretation.

US law does my head in, I'm sure it's not much more complicated than UK law but it gives me brain ache so I gave up trying to find issues, lol I knew there was one with the old Hobba system and it was to do with access to user data & it was explained by someone in one of the old "MUTE" or "GUARDIANS ANNOUNCED NOW" threads (or something like that) if someone wants to dredge it up

I'll go ahead and get down off my soapbox now lol...(this is why I stopped working in moderation before someone stoned me for ranting too much)

Yeah. the images have like black blank figures of Habbos with question marks in them, and it looks like we can see what they say in the bullying case but we wont be able to know what their real Habbo name is.

With the law thing, if people are saying that Hobbas were removed due to legal issues (it was actually for security issues and the growing popular (whatever the hell that means)), I don't see how that can happen, because according to what people are saying here, they were police vetted. Which would be in compliances with government legislation anyway. Also let's not bring in US law over UK, AU, CA or any other countries' laws. We all know Hobbas didn't work the same on the US hotel, like they did on the rest of them. Clearly the law wasn't an issue, and I am sure Sulake are considering legalities whenever it comes to something like this (despite recent situations of poor moderation, we have been telling them since they made all mods redundant and replaced them with non-English speaking staff that it is going to cause massive quality control problems).
27-07-2012, 03:20 PM
atpeak

Quote:

Originally Posted by LucasAge

Yeah. the images have like black blank figures of Habbos with question marks in them, and it looks like we can see what they say in the bullying case but we wont be able to know what their real Habbo name is.

With the law thing, if people are saying that Hobbas were removed due to legal issues (it was actually for security issues and the growing popular (whatever the hell that means)), I don't see how that can happen, because according to what people are saying here, they were police vetted. Which would be in compliances with government legislation anyway. Also let's not bring in US law over UK, AU, CA or any other countries' laws. We all know Hobbas didn't work the same on the US hotel, like they did on the rest of them. Clearly the law wasn't an issue, and I am sure Sulake are considering legalities whenever it comes to something like this (despite recent situations of poor moderation, we have been telling them since they made all mods redundant and replaced them with non-English speaking staff that it is going to cause massive quality control problems).

Of course US law was the issue of Hobbas not having any real powers on the US hotel. The US law states that no one can have access to your records unless they are contracted to do so and employed by the company in a specific dept which meant that Habbo had to fork out more money into hiring more US mods and letting any age people become a "guide Hobba" in the US hotel.

Also I will show you an email that was sent confidentially to all the Hobbas of why the system was being removed. This was never meant to be public but a friend of a Hobba leaked it out.

---------- Post added 27-07-2012 at 04:29 PM ----------

Here is the email sent out to Hobbas in their last month of service

http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=113491

It outlines the security and legal issues like @Bob1 said about CRB and vetting laws

*REMOVED*

Edited by Chris (Forum Moderator): Please do not ask for reputation!
27-07-2012, 03:52 PM
Agesilaus

Quote:

Originally Posted by atpeak

Of course US law was the issue of Hobbas not having any real powers on the US hotel. The US law states that no one can have access to your records unless they are contracted to do so and employed by the company in a specific dept which meant that Habbo had to fork out more money into hiring more US mods and letting any age people become a "guide Hobba" in the US hotel.

Also I will show you an email that was sent confidentially to all the Hobbas of why the system was being removed. This was never meant to be public but a friend of a Hobba leaked it out.

---------- Post added 27-07-2012 at 04:29 PM ----------

Here is the email sent out to Hobbas in their last month of service

http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=113491

It outlines the security and legal issues like @Bob1 said about CRB and vetting laws

*REMOVED*

Edited by Chris (Forum Moderator): Please do not ask for reputation!

That's interesting. However, I still think there is more to this. Something is not right. I'm not saying it's fake, it's clearly true what was posted. I'm talking about behind the scenes...

So the question is how do you think we will review bullying cases without chat logs? I still believe that Guardians will get to see the chatlog provided with masked Habbo names. Just a guess though.
27-07-2012, 03:58 PM
atpeak

Quote:

Originally Posted by LucasAge

That's interesting. However, I still think there is more to this. Something is not right. I'm not saying it's fake, it's clearly true what was posted. I'm talking about behind the scenes...

So the question is how do you think we will review bullying cases without chat logs? I still believe that Guardians will get to see the chatlog provided with masked Habbo names. Just a guess though.

Another issue was that it actually cost more to have hobbas than actual paid moderators
27-07-2012, 04:11 PM
Agesilaus

Quote:

Originally Posted by atpeak

Another issue was that it actually cost more to have hobbas than actual paid moderators

That's not what I meant. I meant legally speaking, sorry.

In regards to your point though, I do not believe it would have costed them more. Moderators constantly get paid. There would also be expenses for training in all areas they need to know, and in order to train someone these days and get them up to scratch, the costs involved are the equivalent to one employee's annual salary. The way Silver Hobbas were being interviewed and trained were by Super Hobbas, that were also volunteers. So it would have effectively costed them less money in that regard.
27-07-2012, 04:16 PM
e5

Paul said 2 weeks around a week ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Intersocial

Even though it's a little snippet, seems quite interesting I suppose. Not saying I agree/disagree with it, it just seems quite interesting haha. Any idea when it will be implemented or do you only know a very minor bit of it? :P

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page