Printable View
How come your aloud to have pictures of "Celebraties" in our avatars and signatures but are not aloud pictures of ourselfs or others, what is the diffrence, it is still a picturre of a person, i could see myself as a celebraty so therfor techniqually have a picture of me in my avatar. You cant have one rule for one type of picture and another for a diffrent type.
There is already a thread on this...
http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=527315
celebrities are well known aNd we're not. so yeah. funny, this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by :DJ-Small:
That is completly diffrent to what i am saying, that is going on about how you cant imbed pictures but u can post a link, i am asking why we can have pictures of so called "Celebraties" in our avs and sigs but not ourselfs when its all showing a picture of a HUMAN BEING, so wats the diffrence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpoke
Myn is a Question towards The admin, not a disscussion like the other thread.
Their popular anyone can see them on tv etc, your not famous, your not on tv all the time..
Not as if any celebs on here..
No, your incorrect, a celebratly could be anyone who you belive is a celebratly, so if i though my friend or me was a celebratly becuase loads of people know him/me i should be able to post a picutre of him or me. Its the fact that your saying we cant post pictures of ourselfs but we can aswell.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sc0tteh
So I can take a picture of my cousin and have him as my avatar because he plays for Manchester City under 9's? He's playing football for a team which is in the Premiership... surely it makes him famous? :S
You got what i was saying in one pinch :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Minstrels
I see what you are saying but really celebrates are always visible on the net, TV etc so really they are used to being plastered over the web and they are not going to moan in they are embedded on a website whereas members may complain and want their picture removed from posts which becomes a pain. Also this could be used to bully other members claiming that it's a picture of you when its really a picture of another member who doesn't want their picture in your avatar? :SQuote:
Originally Posted by :DJ-Small:
Yes, and you have have backed up my point why ither pictures should be allowed or shouldnt, someone could post a picture in their av of another memeber and say that they think they are famous in their opinion using this to bull the member, and you cant do anythink about it becuase if they belive the person is a celebraty, you have to agree becuase every1 has their own versions on celebs and who they are and you cant just say, he is a celeb, he isnt ect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.OSH
Angelina Jolie = Celebirty.Quote:
Originally Posted by :DJ-Small:
My Dad's mate who came to fix the radiator yesterday, who I also saw drinking a beer on Eastenders in that one episode = Not a celebrity.
I think you can judge who and who isn't a celebrity by saying to yourself "Will I be the only person who knows this person on the forum?" before you pop them in your avatar. If you find 99% of people ask you who's in there then its time to say "Maybe my friend isn't as famous as I thought".
As far as I remember, celebrity used to mean celebrate talent. I don't think many people on this forum have a unique and special talent that makes them special :P
From reading this thread people have said that using a picture of yourself in your avater can lead to bullying. But having a celeb is alright because they are well known by almost everyone. So if thats the case, if a celeb come to habboxforum and used a picture of themselves in there avatar you would have to infract them for posting a picture of themselves. ;)
Yes but it is simple - here is the test:Quote:
Originally Posted by :DJ-Small:
- Are they in the media regularly?
- Do a lot of people around the world know who they are?
^ That basically tells us if they are a celebrity or not. You can't argue that it is hard to distinguish between a celebrity and a normal person as to be honest that is just silly. :P
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=def...ient=firefox-a
Celebrity is a widely known person, you are not.
I can see your point and that, but then improving on it, why are we allowed to post links of us in the expose yourself thread and not the image? :S
That is very confusing indeed, perhaps the rule could be changed to allow members to post pictures of themselves, provided they're not added to signatures and avatars or uploaded to Habbox/HabboxForum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ains
yea, you could see yourself as a celeb? wthQuote:
Originally Posted by :DJ-Small:
noone knows you LOL
why are you so desprite to put your pic in your avatar anyway?
Becuase i wanted to post a picture of ma new pink mohawk in ma av.Quote:
Originally Posted by Abbie.
I recall the reason for links being allowed and embedding not is due to the fact that if it's embedded into the forum, it can be seen by a link on this website. If it can be seen on this website it's the managements responsibility. If it's on an external link, then it's off the website and therefore the responsibility of the other website, not the management.
That make no sense though. If people upload the images onto an external website and put it inbetween images tags then it's fine with that logic in mind :/Quote:
Originally Posted by joshuar
Then just shove something in the terms and conditions, which is what sites like Facebook and MySpace do.Quote:
Originally Posted by joshuar
"You are solely responsible for the photos, profiles (including your name, image, and likeness), messages, notes, text, information, music, video, advertisements, listings, and other content that you upload, publish or display (hereinafter, "post") on or through the Service or the Site" From Facebook.
That's what I remember being said when it was first introduced, it made sense at the time, or at least to me.
Plank's idea seems like a good one, but we'll have to see what the powers that be think of it.
If I'm completely honest with you I don't 100% remember the reasoning (though valid points have been raised), I seem to remember that sierk had a good rationale though so I'll ask him and let you know :) Or he might post on here himself.
As far as avatars go, they are uploaded onto the site so we will probably not allow photos in avatars but who knows?
EDIT: Obviously this is about having yourself in avatars, the difference between celebrities and members is pretty clear cut to members of moderation, unless a user is a person of well-known fame, they do not count as a celebrity.