counterproductive moderation.

[beth]

It wasn't pointless but it was unconstructive to the original question. Like I said, forum management are going to discuss it and change it if they see a need to.

but surely threads are allowed to change course and develop?

[Catchy]

but surely threads are allowed to change course and develop?

ye I agree cause if they didn't they'd be no conversation, no banter and no debating isn't that the whole point of a forum?

oh and i'd love to see this staff spam everyones banging on about cause competition staff spam is so boring... zzz... so you aint missing out on much. even if they were deleted people wouldn't use the spam section because some people just don't like it and you can't force somebody to post there.

It can actually be really scary posting in spam i admit because you never really know what to expect. sure you can just brush it on the shoulder if you get any comments you don't want to hear and i know most of the time it is just banter lots of the time people fail to understand this and take it really personally so i can see why some people are put off by spam, it shouldn't be like this but it is.

and the fact that lots of people are saying well staff should conversate with us well i'm sure loads of you wouldn't even want to conversate with half the staff if even given the chance, just sayin

[Chris]

but surely threads are allowed to change course and develop?

Yes of course, this thread is an example of that. The problem is nothing to do with a thread evolving though, its to do with posts being unconstructive to the thread creators question.

Once it has been clarified by forum management then we can work to improve the issue if they see that there is one.

[Stephen]

It's stupid cos it's like we can't joke around in a normal thread

Like Tom saying animals are delicious...oh damn his post lacks seriousness *edits*

[Lee]

It's stupid cos it's like we can't joke around in a normal thread

Like Tom saying animals are delicious...oh damn his post lacks seriousness *edits*

I'd be quite annoyed if I posted a serious thread and then you came and "joked around" in it...

[Catchy]

I'd be quite annoyed if I posted a serious thread and then you came and "joked around" in it...

how would that annoy you? lol :S just wondering it just seems a bit strange that you'd get worked up about something which really isn't important

[Lee]

how would that annoy you? lol :S just wondering it just seems a bit strange that you'd get worked up about something which really isn't important

Well unfortunately I disagree hence my comment.

[GirlNextDoor15]

You don't expect everybody to be serious all the time. It's supposed to be a discussion and everybody can discuss happily with it instead of crying cause the mods are too serious and power mad

[FlyingJesus]

FJ, the mentioning of a porn site by name has always been against the rules for pretty obvious reasons i.e. some younger member might decide to look up what you had quoted and then his parents walk in the room. It's a no brainer in my opinion. Get a grip!

Then it ought to actually be written in the rules. I quite agree that it makes sense for it to be a rule, but since it's not in there it shouldn't be acted on currently

I'm not saying it isn't harsh, but his post isn't constructive to what the thread creator asked. The rules state that a post is pointless if it isn't constructive.

Even assuming that your illogical and oversimplified way of thinking does render that particular post pointless, there's also the issue of me answering (extremely directly) a thread on what cheers us up and you refused to concede the point that I'd done so, simply on the basis that you for some reason couldn't understand what I was saying. If you're going to moderate everything to the letter of the rules then it would be great if you did so for all posts rather than picking and choosing whenever you feel like throwing messages at me

It's stupid cos it's like we can't joke around in a normal thread

Like Tom saying animals are delicious...oh damn his post lacks seriousness *edits*

Errr I was totes serious animals are very much delicious

[GommeInc]

It wasn't pointless but it was unconstructive to the original question. Like I said, forum management are going to discuss it and change it if they see a need to.

Then don't call it pointless and refuse to edit a post of a member which is within the rules. Management need to learn what the difference is between off-topic and pointless, and even then a discussion with FlyingJesus could happen with what he said. You could reply with "So you only like animals because they are tasty, FJ?" Something that is off-topic must be something that cannot be replied to in a way which distracts from the purpose of the thread.

Also, another thing I have noticed with Habbox. Who is "management"? I remember when people talked about management using their names - like "I'd talk to jrh" etc. You don't get that these days either :/

edit: On a side note - no thread on this forum should be taken that seriously - it's a Habbo fansite, nothing is to be taken seriously and the thread in question isn't a strictly serious thread, unless someone is doing strict research from the RSPCA about why animal haters hate animals.