Habbox History

[scott]

Back then no it wasn't - as a Rare Values REPORTER you only noted down values you saw whereas with him being the manager actually updated them.

so he's on it for being rare values manager and doing his job? or am I confused :p

[MKR&*42]

It's not a stupid debate. Using that definition you give, it is clearly the part about something being a 'noteworthy' achievement that is subjective and remains open to interpretation depending on where people set the bar of something being 'noteworthy.' Creating some form of objective criteria to judge people on a Hall of Fame that'll be accepted by the majority therefore is likely to be impossible. The thing about professional organisations is that the people in said organisations are paid to just go along with whatever senior management force on them.

Beat me to the 'Noteworthy Achievement' bit.

Also Warren and GM who said it should be scrapped, why didn't you say that before?

Because, before I didn't expect it to turn out into a gigantic debate over certain individuals (specifically ,Jess,), and thus take much longer than needed (that's not your fault). Hall Of Fame seems like a nice idea on the cover (probably why I originally didn't mind it), but once you go into the ambiguity and subjective opinion it eliminates such a need for one.

Mike was the other AGM by the way.

[Samantha]

so he's on it for being rare values manager and doing his job? or am I confused :p

Well I believe he did a fair bit for the Rare Watch part of the department which was rather popular in the day, I was told various factors about who I should have and shouldn't.

---------- Post added 04-11-2012 at 06:31 PM ----------

Beat me to the 'Noteworthy Achievement' bit.



Because, before I didn't expect it to turn out into a gigantic debate over certain individuals (specifically ,Jess,), and thus take much longer than needed (that's not your fault). Hall Of Fame seems like a nice idea on the cover (probably why I originally didn't mind it), but once you go into the ambiguity and subjective opinion it eliminates such a need for one.

Mike was the other AGM by the way.

I know Mike was the other.

[lawrawrrr]

And please define what accounts towards "noteworthy achievement" for me? I'm sure "managing to stay on HabboxForum.com for 8 years" would be a 'noteworthy achievement' to a select few, but do they go on this "Hall Of Fame"? Managing a department for a year might be "noteworthy achievement" but does everyone who has accomplished that deserve to go on there?

It's a hall of fame for Habbox staff - not Habbox members.

I actually have said multiple times now that a year's worth of managing isn't worthy; 2 or above might be, and jess' 5 years definitely should be IMO. People should be judged on the amount of time they were a manager, if they dedicated a long time to Habbox and were consistently good (aka, didn't turn into a troll or got banned for x reason) then I think they should be on there. Also if they gave a huge contribution, such as implementing massive ideas or shaping Habbox today - that is, if Habbox wouldn't be the same if they weren't there.

[The Don]

It's a hall of fame for Habbox staff - not Habbox members.

I actually have said multiple times now that a year's worth of managing isn't worthy; 2 or above might be, and jess' 5 years definitely should be IMO. People should be judged on the amount of time they were a manager, if they dedicated a long time to Habbox and were consistently good (aka, didn't turn into a troll or got banned for x reason) then I think they should be on there. Also if they gave a huge contribution, such as implementing massive ideas or shaping Habbox today - that is, if Habbox wouldn't be the same if they weren't there.

that's fine but it should be called something other than hall of fame, maybe there should be a separate one which lists all managers etc, then like a hall of fame for outstanding contributions

[MKR&*42]

It's a hall of fame for Habbox staff - not Habbox members.

I actually have said multiple times now that a year's worth of managing isn't worthy; 2 or above might be, and jess' 5 years definitely should be IMO. People should be judged on the amount of time they were a manager, if they dedicated a long time to Habbox and were consistently good (aka, didn't turn into a troll or got banned for x reason) then I think they should be on there.

If it is more than 2 years, fine, I was only giving an example of a year earlier - not a 'set in concrete' figure.

shaping Habbox today

This is the biggest issue underlining everything (and has been for the past God knows how many posts), that is subject to a lot of opinion and just because 1 person may see an introduction as a really good achievement, it does not mean that everyone else does.( E.g. An update on a certain rule; some people are going to say "well done Chris for introducing such a desirable addition to the rule" whilst others are going to say "pointless and ridiculous". )

Literally going round in circles. Third time - don't call it HOF or just scrap it.

[lawrawrrr]

If it is more than 2 years, fine, I was only giving an example of a year earlier - not a 'set in concrete' figure.



This is the biggest issue underlining everything (and has been for the past God knows how many posts), that is subject to a lot of opinion and just because 1 person may see an introduction as a really good achievement, it does not mean that everyone else does.( E.g. An update on a certain rule; some people are going to say "well done Chris for introducing such a desirable addition to the rule" whilst others are going to say "pointless and ridiculous". )

Literally going round in circles. Third time - don't call it HOF or just scrap it.

It's not subject to opinion at all. Sam's always asking for a lot of input from other people and things, and management also have a lot of sway over who gets in there. It's not Sam's fault if noone else helped her!!

The name doesn't need changing either as it is a modern epithet and doesn't subscribe to changing definitions of the word 'fame' (yes I'm now so annoyed I'm going all technical). Like I said earlier, fame in this context does NOT mean famous whatsoever. Besides, your example is completely moot as there are specific criteria and management of both the user's time and the current management have to recognize the individual's achievement. If there's even a slight disagreement I'm sure they'll arrive at a fair decision. Not biased whatsoever. I know for a fact there's people that Sam and some of the AGMs don't really like on that list so you know!

that's fine but it should be called something other than hall of fame, maybe there should be a separate one which lists all managers etc, then like a hall of fame for outstanding contributions

That was suggested before (not sure if in Content Designers only or Public but it was scrapped as there is already a list of managers - the page would be massive if all past managers had a description and stuff.

[Alkaz]

I'm pretty sure I created a "HOF" page ages ago which just showed the persons name, their avatar and the job title for what they were on the page for. Something like that would be good instead of HOF, just have another page entirely with just a short description of their contribution i.e. '5 years as HxL Manager'.

[Yonder]

I'm pretty sure I created a "HOF" page ages ago which just showed the persons name, their avatar and the job title for what they were on the page for. Something like that would be good instead of HOF, just have another page entirely with just a short description of their contribution i.e. '5 years as HxL Manager'.

Just stick this stuff on the Habbox wiki. Remove HOF. Certain members(staff) will have bigger wiki pages as they have contributed more or they have done something in particular which creates more content on the wiki.

[Samantha]

Just stick this stuff on the Habbox wiki. Remove HOF. Certain members(staff) will have bigger wiki pages as they have contributed more or they have done something in particular which creates more content on the wiki.

That's why you should help me with your Wiki page .

Well really if you're just going to remove it then I've wasted (and others') time? That doesn't seem fair as many were willing to help before but just because Jess isn't on it because I couldn't say as much about her it should be removed?