Yeah that rule makes the same rule clearer. No change.
Printable View
Yeah that rule makes the same rule clearer. No change.
I will look at what I can do although we don't want spam, but we do want discussion. I will change the rule how I think that it will allow more discussion (i.e. going slightly off topic) and perhaps allow briefer posts, but not things like LOL etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by sex
Yeah, sounds good, we don't want things like lol or even cool but I want to be able to have ever so slightly off topic posts within threads without being penalised.
like i already said ;l lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by sex
I thought the rule was you're allowed to post something non-related to what the thread started said, so long as what you're saying relates to the post you're quoting. If this is so what's wrong with that?
I think that is what it used to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by HotelUser
Why was that changed, then?Quote:
Originally Posted by doherty
It hasnt been changed...Quote:
Originally Posted by HotelUser
To me that says a pointless post has no relevance to the topic, or any previous post, meaning that if it doesn't have relevance to the topic it must have relevance to another previous post!Quote:
A pointless post has no relevance to the topic, any previous post that is relevant
I will add the "or" though if you think it's needed.
When did that actually change because I always thought that providing it stayed on topic within a post in the thread, it was fine. Or am I being stupid?
So then why can't the rule on pointless posting be amended to what Cat suggested, and Jake, discussions can still spark other discussions in the same thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oli
It didn't change, see above post! You were the one that wrote the rule :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Garion
@ dave, read the post above lol it says a post has to be relevant to the topic or another post.
They can't. Read the bit about contributing, my example that I gave about the colour and the car could be penalised with the current rule.Quote:
Originally Posted by HotelUser
It was my understanding (having actually written the rule...) that that was indeed the case. The only difference between the current rule and the one proposed appears to be that under the "new" rule people could start a ridiculous conversation that hasn't followed on from the thread at all and only the first person to mention it would be reprimanded. Say there's a thread about fish fingers, if someone posts up "hi I love hairless cats" this would currently be removed for pointless posting, as would replies to it because they are by default pointless - after all, if that post is pointless it should be removed, and therefore replies to it would look out of the blue themselves. It makes very little sense to change this as far as I can see.
Sorry, I missed your example Jake! Surly that cannot be considered as pointless posting, because in both you refer to the colour red which is key in the initial post!Quote:
Originally Posted by doherty
This is correct and nothing in the current rule suggests that this would be pointless.Quote:
Originally Posted by HotelUser
http://www.habboxforum.com/showthrea...58#post6461058
http://www.habboxforum.com/showthrea...50#post6460050
This is what I meant. Just got a PM about those. They are replying to two people who have quoted me. Sure, it's not adding anything to the original discussion but it's not my fault I have been spoken to. Being penalised for replying and promoting discussion.
Neither of those links work for me Jake, even when I try edit your post :(
If you have an issue with any moderation then PM me, it's simple really, I happen to agree with you on those two posts aren't pointless and will sort them.Quote:
Originally Posted by doherty
Yeah, I'm not bothered about them, just thought using an example was the best way to get my point across. If you agree, maybe alter the rule so the moderators don't interpret it differently as they have done.
I think a simple clarification of the current pointless posting rule for Moderators would suffice, rather than pointlessly changing the rule altogether.
Yeha, like a thread in mod forum or something would do the job
I was warned for:Quote:
Originally Posted by doherty
http://www.habboxforum.com/showthrea...89#post6459089
and the rule quoted was:
My post was relevant to the previous post thus wasn't a pointless post. I think the rules need to be clarified for Moderators again or they need to be less strict as even if the rules were strict, I shouldnt have been warned as it was revelant to the previous post. But yeah, Oli is sorting it :).Quote:
A6. Do not post pointlessly ~ A pointless post has no relevance to the topic, any previous post that is relevant, is meaningless (ghnrgher etc) or does little to contribute to the discussion.
I think the majority of our moderators know how to apply the current rules but I will clarify.
I've not had any problems with pointless posting (until these instances tonight) which means they're clearly doing something right :P
looks like that danzooo fella needs some moderation lessons
Edited by Bolt660 (Forum Super Moderator): Please do not target or be negative towards other forum members.
Don't be mean kyle, it's confusing! Also, what has confused me more, in the PM about my usernote being removed I was told they were on the verge of breaking the rules, lol. They either are or aren't.
Another idea I was thinking of is allowing new members to have a slightly bigger avatar. When I registered a new account last month, I didn't bother having an avatar as 90x100 is quite small.
and yeah Jake, I just got the same PM.
lmao innit, i had an av, saw how small it was and quickly removed
Well no, there is something called borderline, Jake.Quote:
Originally Posted by doherty
I think 90x100 is fine, although I always wondered why it was not 100x100.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saurav
Yeah but with that rule, Oli they are replying to another post in that thread therefore not borderline unless I misunderstood the rule.
Yes but my post related to the previous post so surely thats not boderline - as the rules state if it relates to the previous post, its allowed?Quote:
Originally Posted by Oli
Perhaps not? Your sanction was removed so I don't really see the issue here. I don't quite know what the Super Moderator is getting at telling you the posts were borderline but it's certainly not an issue, as the issue was the moderator's actions had been reversed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saurav
This thread is in regards to Forum Activity, and Forum Moderation is not reducing forum activity at present, so yeah, back on topic please?
Could have well put a new user off though. They wouldn't know how to go about getting it changed and I assume every usernote isn't checked in detail.
From experience, if a new user has a problem with something they have been sent by a moderator they reply to the PM the moderator sends, the moderator is then required to explain why they made their decision and inform the member of who to PM if they wish to appeal.Quote:
Originally Posted by doherty
Moderators are always going to make mistakes, as they are human.
i wouldnt mind if everyone was allowed to play arcade (without limits) and everyone was allowed same size sigs and avs
About avatars, maybe change it to 100x100 as then at least its slightly bigger.
Your way promotion system pretty much becomes useless...Quote:
Originally Posted by sex
I completely agree about the arcade. I think people's signatures are really too big as it is, but that's just personal taste I suppose.Quote:
Originally Posted by sex
I'm willing to increase the size to 100x100, as I said I was always baffled as to why it was 90x100!Quote:
Originally Posted by Saurav
I strongly believe the avatars should progress as you become an older member, I think the smaller avatars on HxF are quite nice compared to other forums where people always have huge avatars.
In regards to the arcade, again it's nice to build things up for members but then again perhaps the plays are quite limited at the moment, although recently increased.
The arcade limits are good. It made me post more on my new account to try and get the limits off.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oli
Oooh, good to see that they do work :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Saurav