From my experience at Habbox, the aim was always to strike a balance between discussion and trial. While we didn't want to jump into decisions too quickly (hence our refusal to add forums we considered "fads" and our insistence that a consistent demand was shown for that forum before we added it) but at the same time we couldn't discuss every possibility or predict every outcome.
In the past, Habbox has made the mistake of trying to stick with its decisions and force them to work even when it was clear that the best option would be to abandon the plan. GMs learned from the mistakes of their predecessors very quickly and decided that there was a balance needed between both discussion and a trial period of sorts to see if it works, and lots of major changes were implemented with BETA periods.
I don't know the specifics of this case, so it could be an outlier, but usually things are discussed quite a bit, but (hopefully) not discussed to death.






Reply With Quote

, seeing as it's still a rank above normal!

It would be so much worse if they didn't try out new things and just stuck to the old systems because that has always been the way to do it. Nothing in life happens positively without a bit of trial and error.




