Discover Habbo's history
Treat yourself with a Secret Santa gift.... of a random Wiki page for you to start exploring Habbo's history!
Happy holidays!
Celebrate with us at Habbox on the hotel, on our Forum and right here!
Join Habbox!
One of us! One of us! Click here to see the roles you could take as part of the Habbox community!


Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    5,642
    Tokens
    12,065
    Habbo
    djclune

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    I thought the application was a joke? Surely it's not that big of a deal unless it was a genuine application/pm
    edit: ok can see jen acutally didn't want it
    if the person however doesn't want it on the forum, then the person who posted it should remove it
    Last edited by The Don; 19-06-2011 at 11:53 PM.
    That's when Ron vanished, came back speaking Spanish
    Lavish habits, two rings, twenty carats

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    10,595
    Tokens
    25
    Habbo
    Catzsy

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Don View Post
    I thought the application was a joke? Surely it's not that big of a deal unless it was a genuine application/pm
    edit: ok can see jen acutally didn't want it
    if the person however doesn't want it on the forum, then the person who posted it should remove it
    I can see this point of view. It was a spoof pm it was not a serious one. Had it been then yes it would have been totally wrong. 'Rules' were being broken all over the place in the 'name' of the 'truth or dare' thread yesterday and that was considered 'fun' but this wasn't. Not sure I understand why tbh. In normal circumstances, though, I do not agree they should be published without the agreement of both parties.
    Last edited by Catzsy; 20-06-2011 at 09:35 AM.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,195
    Tokens
    3,454

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Recursion View Post
    Because obviously some people aren't going to want to make all their messages public, but on occasion, like today, I don't see the issue, it's not exactly damaging.
    It isn't, however my view was if the rule is there it should be applied. I had nothing against the PM as it was amusing, however if you are allowed to break the rules in one thread, you have to allow the breaking of rules elsewhere.

    I didn't initially have a problem with the PM, however I did have an issue when my PM was removed, but Dave put his back after it was removed (again, no problem with Dave - I just didn't think that was very fair on the 'smaller guy'!)

    Quote Originally Posted by Catz View Post
    I can see this point of view. It was a spoof pm it was not a serious one. Had it been then yes it would have been totally wrong. 'Rules' were being broken all over the place in the 'name' of the 'truth or dare' thread yesterday and that was considered 'fun' but this wasn't. Not sure I understand why tbh.
    They were but eventually rules were pulled down on the thread (such as encouraging others to break the rules by posting pointlessly..)


  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    10,595
    Tokens
    25
    Habbo
    Catzsy

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marketing View Post
    It isn't, however my view was if the rule is there it should be applied. I had nothing against the PM as it was amusing, however if you are allowed to break the rules in one thread, you have to allow the breaking of rules elsewhere.

    I didn't initially have a problem with the PM, however I did have an issue when my PM was removed, but Dave put his back after it was removed (again, no problem with Dave - I just didn't think that was very fair on the 'smaller guy'!)



    They were but eventually rules were pulled down on the thread (such as encouraging others to break the rules by posting pointlessly..)
    So does that mean we should go back and edit those threads seriously as 'normal' rule breaks? We accepted and the members accepted that it was part of the 'fun' so I see no reason that this thread wasn't accepted in the same spirit as those. This is my personal opinion.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,195
    Tokens
    3,454

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catz View Post
    So does that mean we should go back and edit those threads seriously as 'normal' rule breaks? We accepted and the members accepted that it was part of the 'fun' so I see no reason that this thread wasn't accepted in the same spirit as those. This is my personal opinion.
    Gonna have to be a spoil sport and say...Stop daring people to post threads in the incorrect forums because I've been told the posts have to be edited as encouraging members to break the forum rules....
    If that is applied, then so does the PM and any other rule break relating to the thread.


  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    10,595
    Tokens
    25
    Habbo
    Catzsy

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marketing View Post
    If that is applied, then so does the PM and any other rule break relating to the thread.
    Where is that post quoted from?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,195
    Tokens
    3,454

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catz View Post
    Where is that post quoted from?
    Truth or Dare thread. Scott was told by an AGM or Matt I imagine.


  8. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    10,595
    Tokens
    25
    Habbo
    Catzsy

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catz View Post
    Where is that post quoted from?
    I don't think it was suggested that it should be applied retrospectively so my point still stands.

    Scott posted at 8.16 pm
    http://www.habboxforum.com/showthrea...22#post7163622


    The thread was posted at 5.56 when 'breaking the rules for fun' was still being considered okay.
    http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=706759

    In these circumstances still harsh in my opinion.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,195
    Tokens
    3,454

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catz View Post
    I don't think it was suggested that it should be applied retrospectively so my point still stands.

    Scott posted at 8.16 pm
    http://www.habboxforum.com/showthrea...22#post7163622


    The thread was posted at 5.56 when 'breaking the rules for fun' was still being considered okay.
    http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=706759

    In these circumstances still harsh in my opinion.
    The difference is, obviously the PM thread was still there and had nothing done to it. Whereas the threads posted in the wrong places had already been dealt with. I don't see what is harsh in your opinion? It isn't like Dave got warned/usernoted/infracted or whatever. How since that particular thread had not been dealt with at all, the stricter rule has to be applied.


  10. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    10,595
    Tokens
    25
    Habbo
    Catzsy

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marketing View Post
    The difference is, obviously the PM thread was still there and had nothing done to it. Whereas the threads posted in the wrong places had already been dealt with. I don't see what is harsh in your opinion? It isn't like Dave got warned/usernoted/infracted or whatever. How since that particular thread had not been dealt with at all, the stricter rule has to be applied.
    Only dealt with i.e. moved back to spam as if they were left there they would have been considered as pointless/spamming. No pms and not regarded as rule breaks. The pm was a 'spoof' only sent as part of a dare. Hardly a private affair. That thread was already already in spam so what needed to be dealt with? How do you know what action was taken against David, anyway? I don't I see it as harsh as everybody else was allowed to 'break the rules' without impunity except for one. Harsh.
    Last edited by Catzsy; 20-06-2011 at 10:30 AM.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •