Rule Need Reviewing - opinion

[GommeInc]

I think it's more the positioning of the 'Do not avoid the forum filter' in the rules that may cause some confusion as its position within the rule A2 would imply that it's only a rule if it's an inappropriate post when I do think it's taken more generally. Whether that's a good thing or not is entirely up for debate, I personally don't think it is. It's a forum, there's bound to be some banter every now and again.

Indeed, avoiding the filter is within the "Do not post inappropriately" rule to give the reader an understanding of what can be considering inappropriate. The rule should be read "Is the post inappropriate? Yes? Read on to find out how" but I am being told the post was appropriate, so there is no reason to read the rest of the rule, especially when what I said wasn't inappropriate. It's like they're trying to protect the filter rule because the filter is upset, when no one fleshy, sentient and made of organs gives a damn

That thread you quoted Hecktix in was in the Habbox Feedback forum and I'm sure you're allowed to avoid the filter in the Habbox feedback forum to make a point (as proved by your original post which has not been edited by the moderators even though rosie has been in the thread).

I'm playing the pedantic and paranoid game with the moderators as they seem to love that. No where in that rule does it say the Feedback forum is fine, so I expect all these people to have warnings by the end of the day. If they love making up unofficial rules then it's their problem. My warning is unfair.

[scott]

I'm playing the pedantic and paranoid game with the moderators as they seem to love that. No where in that rule does it say the Feedback forum is fine, so I expect all these people to have warnings by the end of the day. If they love making up unofficial rules then it's their problem. My warning is unfair.

Which would also lead to yourself getting a few infraction in the bargain.

Your warning "Inappropriate Language / Avoiding the filter"

I don't know why you don't understand that it was issued for avoiding the filter and not for being inappropriate.

The rule of "Do not post inappropriately" is just the heading but is many different rules under the one, as to cut the rules down.

[HotelUser]

Goodness knows why that thread is allowed, may I add. It's something you'd expect in the tacky corners of ClubHabbo who find discussion of sex to be oh-so-hilarious, not here..

Oh and lol I don't see a problem with your post and yeah this is somewhere where the whole moderator discetion shabang should be in play. I find it to be pure wit rather than trying to break some rules on a fansite FOR teenagers.. :rolleyes:

It's allowed because it's not breaking any rules. If it were talking about specific things, describing things or the physical act of sexual intercourse than those posts wouldn't be allowed. This has always been the rule and is not some sort of newfound lack of judgement in the current group of moderators. I'd also like to point out that the thread is in the Health, Life & Relationships section and pursues a genuine topic. Again, if it didn't and was just made in humour to giggle at body parts a moderator likely would have removed of it by now.

Having said all that about the have you ever seen your parents having sexual intercourse thread it's not a valid thread to compare to the current situation because the current situation is retaining to filter avoidance. It was inappropriate because it was avoiding the filter but it was removed and dealt with because it was avoiding the filter. You knew the word you were using is against the forum rules when you used it in your post .

Indeed, avoiding the filter is within the "Do not post inappropriately" rule to give the reader an understanding of what can be considering inappropriate. The rule should be read "Is the post inappropriate? Yes? Read on to find out how" but I am being told the post was appropriate, so there is no reason to read the rest of the rule, especially when what I said wasn't inappropriate. It's like they're trying to protect the filter rule because the filter is upset, when no one fleshy, sentient and made of organs gives a damn


I'm playing the pedantic and paranoid game with the moderators as they seem to love that. No where in that rule does it say the Feedback forum is fine, so I expect all these people to have warnings by the end of the day. If they love making up unofficial rules then it's their problem. My warning is unfair.

Should admins start issuing moderators warnings because moderators PM users and have to avoid the filter to explain which words aren't allowed to be used on the forum when a user uses one? Mike is very right and I'm beyond myself why you've brought up not only a feedback post as an example of filter avoidance but one clearly set in the context of feedback. If we are playing by these rules then the first post of your thread here would also be in violation of the forum rules because you avoid the filter with the b word again. There has always been an appropriate amount of lenience in the feedback forums as to argue ones case. If this lenience is taken to vast extremes (such as posting graphic pictures) then it would be considered abused and wouldn't be allowed in the instance. But to make a post like Oli has, or like you have in your original post to try and justify your opinion is perfectly okay.

[Hecktix]

I think you have got somewhat confused here, Gomme. This is the part of the rule that was sanctioned.



The only question as far as I can see is whether the word should be in the filter or not. It has nothing to do with inappropriate adult sexual content but to do with inappropriate language/avoiding the filter in this instance. I agree it has not been used in a rude way here but it is universally accepted as a very derogatory word that if not in the filter could be used to cause great offence to others. A line has to be drawn which words are included in the filter and which are not.

These are the key words in this post. The problem is that members would find it very offensive if it was directed at them so where do you draw the line. Avoiding the filter is 'avoiding the filter'. I do not see the moderators have any discretion at all - it is a black and white issue. Either it avoids the filter or it does not. If we left some then we could be accused of favourtism. I am not sure 'you can avoid the filter as long as it is not aimed at anybody in a rude way' would be a satisfactory alternative. As far as the 'sexual intercourse' thread is concerned yes IMO it is borderline and one wonders about the motives here but as far as I can see nothing breaks the rules and I am sure has been closely monitored by everybody in case it does.

I think it's more the positioning of the 'Do not avoid the forum filter' in the rules that may cause some confusion as its position within the rule A2 would imply that it's only a rule if it's an inappropriate post when I do think it's taken more generally. Whether that's a good thing or not is entirely up for debate, I personally don't think it is. It's a forum, there's bound to be some banter every now and again.

That thread you quoted Hecktix in was in the Habbox Feedback forum and I'm sure you're allowed to avoid the filter in the Habbox feedback forum to make a point (as proved by your original post which has not been edited by the moderators even though rosie has been in the thread).

The above posts are the best responses to GommeInc's original post within this thread, +rep.

I'm playing the pedantic and paranoid game with the moderators as they seem to love that. No where in that rule does it say the Feedback forum is fine, so I expect all these people to have warnings by the end of the day. If they love making up unofficial rules then it's their problem. My warning is unfair.

- not so long ago, the HabboxForum Rules were much more detailed than they are now, however following pushes and suggestions by members such as yourself to condense the rules so they are easier to read - perhaps this is one of the reasons they shouldn't be condensed, as Rosie pointed out (and let me also point out that Rosie is the most experienced moderator on HabboxForum and most certainly wouldn't be "making up rules", it's a rule that's been in existence since the very beginning) you broke the avoiding the filter part. The rules will not be black & white, if we had everything that is and isn't accepted written out on the rules page it'd be very, very long.

As you've admitted playing "the pedantic paranoid game" aka "having a childish tantrum because you've got a warning for something which has been against the rules since HabboxForum opened", I'm going to close this thread because I don't have time for childish tantrums when actually this thread is really an infraction appeal (which we've already gone through a tonne of those with you). If you want to argue that it's not an infraction appeal, please view what I add in response to Scott's post.

Which would also lead to yourself getting a few infraction in the bargain.

Your warning "Inappropriate Language / Avoiding the filter"

I don't know why you don't understand that it was issued for avoiding the filter and not for being inappropriate.

The rule of "Do not post inappropriately" is just the heading but is many different rules under the one, as to cut the rules down.

You are quite right Scott, however due to this, I think we should probably start expanding the rules more. If anybody wants to oppose/suggest things for expanding the forum rules, please create a new feedback thread, but this one isn't remaining as it's a childish tantrum in response to a nothing but fair warning for someone deliberately avoiding the forum filter when there were more appropriate alternative words he could have used, such as "illegitimate".