i don't get it

[Inseriousity.]

Yeh but the 'FU' in the spoiler wasn't directed at anyone either so it wasn't really being rude

It's the context that's important. The context of FU in terms of insulting someone isn't right. Putting something avoiding the filter in a spoiler with warningisn't against the rules (unless its directed at someone). Putting something avoiding the filter in a spoiler with warning because it's a loophole is.Your post clearly showed it was placed in a spoiler to get around the ruleandothers joined in with you hence the warnings.

[Chris]

In that case, the current rules need to be updated as we can't rely on "you should know by now...." which is a rather weak reason to justify issuing infractions to a post which hasn't actually broke a single rules. Or can moderators infract anyone regardless if their post breaks a rule, if they can justify it with the reason “you are mature enough to know by now…”

No the rules are fine, although A3 could possibly be tweaked if its going to cause this much fuss. Rule A2 is for inappropriate content which does not include filter avoidance and is purely for inappropriate comments, videos or images. As you can see there is an entirely separate rule for filter avoidance which clearly states that no filter avoidance is allowed including abbreviations (Which isn't entirely true because some abbreviations are allowed so this could be tweaked).

YEAH i know this i was trying to make a point but i can't remember what LOLOL
anyway it's a bit silly to have "avoiding filter" if you are actually allowed to avoid the filter. it would make more sense to infract for "being rude/insulting" for words such as 'fu' instead of avoiding filter if that's the case

When in the spam forums there is a lot of banter which normally involves filtered words. As these words are filtered and the comments which are made are usually said in jest it doesn't really matter and we allow it. However, as some abbreviations are un filtered, they can be used for the same purpose in jest but actually do avoid the filter.

I really confused myself with that, so apologies if it doesn't make a lot of sense.

Yeh but the 'FU' in the spoiler wasn't directed at anyone either so it wasn't really being rude

Actually it was originally directed at someone, although in jest. The point is, the abbreviation avoided the filter and that is why it was removed, not because it was directed at anyone.

[The Don]

It's the context that's important. The context of FU in terms of insulting someone isn't right. Putting something avoiding the filter in a spoiler with warningisn't against the rules. Putting something avoiding the filter in a spoiler with warning because it's a loophole is.Your post clearly showed it was placed in a spoiler to get around the ruleandothers joined in with you hence the warnings.

Yes but there isn't a rule against that? One rule states that you can avoid the filter, the other states you can't (A2 and A3) so there is a rule supporting my argument as well as supporting yours. If you’re allowed to post forbidden content (in a spoiler) then it’s irrelevant whether you’ve done it to avoid the filter or not as you are allowed to post it if you give a clear warning (so it isn’t actually avoiding the filter since the rules state you can, it’s only avoiding the filter if you don’t give a clear warning and place it in a spoiler)

Actually it was originally directed at someone, although in jest. The point is, the abbreviation avoided the filter and that is why it was removed, not because it was directed at anyone.

I made the original comment; I know that I didn't direct it at anyone... I posted "Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu......." the dots filtering the words c and k, so either way, I did avoid the filter, but I didn't post FU (meaning **** you)

[Inseriousity.]

No, context is relevant. By avoiding the filter by using a loophole, you are in essence avoiding the filter unless it was done legitimately which you know it wasn't cos your post clearly refered to it as avoiding rules by using loopholes.

[The Don]

No, context is relevant. By avoiding the filter by using a loophole, you are in essence avoiding the filter unless it was done legitimately which you know it wasn't cos your post clearly refered to it as avoiding rules by using loopholes.

But rule a2 states that filtered content can be posted as long as you give a clear warning and place it in a spoiler. (This argument can go in circles forever) I'm not that fussed over this, just add to rule a2 something such as "*Although filtered content can be posted if a clear warning and spoilers have been used, posting said content for the sheer purpose of avoiding the filter is still against the rules, see A3" or something

[Martin]

But rule a2 states that filtered content can be posted as long as you give a clear warning and place it in a spoiler. (This argument can go in circles forever) I'm not that fussed over this, just add to rule a2 something such as "*Although filtered content can be posted if a clear warning and spoilers have been used, posting said content for the sheer purpose of avoiding the filter is still against the rules, see A3" or something

There is a difference between 'Midly inappropriate content' as stated in rule A2, and avoiding the filter (which is not mentioned until rule A3.) Rule A2 does not say anything about filtered content as far as I can see. Either way as the rule states its down to moderators discretion and you avoided the filter deliberately whilst knowing you were doing it to get around the rules and so obviously we are not going to allow this.

[Adam]

I don't know.

Edited by Catzsy (Forum Super Moderator) : Please don't make pointless posts

[Chris]

You're exploiting very minor flaws in the rules to try and be clever when we both know that you cant avoid the filter by putting it in the spoilers and anyone else who reads the rules will figure that out too. I'm sure sct and brandon will be happy to add these tweaks to the rules though if it puts a stop to these disputes.

[The Don]

There is a difference between 'Midly inappropriate content' as stated in rule A2, and avoiding the filter (which is not mentioned until rule A3.) Rule A2 does not say anything about filtered content as far as I can see. Either way as the rule states its down to moderators discretion and you avoided the filter deliberately whilst knowing you were doing it to get around the rules and so obviously we are not going to allow this.

Moderators Discretion shows the weakness in the moderator’s argument as they can't justify their reason, which for habbox, doesn't look very professional. Mildly inappropriate content, which is why songs which contain the F word are allowed to be posted (the f words filtered, isn't it?) which is why FU is allowed to be posted under this rule. The only reason you are punishing me for using it is because I clearly stated I had found a loophole, which it is. Rule a3 says you can't avoid the filter but a2 says you can post inappropriate content (a.k.a avoiding the filter) which is why the rules need to be modified.

[Eoin247]

I actualy think that as long as it's put in a spoiler with an obvious and clear warning , pretty much near anything should be allowed in it. I really don't see a reason that this cannot be the case. So with regards to the spoilers i agree with the don.