Calm down a little.. :l

[Orangeesh]

Some of it you have to follow exactly and other bits you use your judgement so that = a GUIDE.
If anything comes along that means the guide needs altering/updating then it gets done.

well then it isnt a strict moderation guide isit
if some parts are based on your own judgement

[jrh2002]

well then it isnt a strict moderation guide isit
if some parts are based on your own judgement

guide
–verb (used with object)

1.to assist (a person) to travel through, or reach a destination in, an unfamiliar area, as by accompanying or giving directions to the person: He guided us through the forest.

2.to accompany (a sightseer) to show points of interest and to explain their meaning or significance.

3.to force (a person, object, or animal) to move in a certain path.

4.to supply (a person) with advice or counsel, as in practical or spiritual affairs.

5.to supervise (someone's actions or affairs) in an advisory capacity. –noun

6.a person who guides, esp. one hired to guide travelers, tourists, hunters, etc.

7.a mark, tab, or the like, to catch the eye and thus provide quick reference.

8.a guidebook.

9.a book, pamphlet, etc., giving information, instructions, or advice; handbook: an investment guide.

10.a guidepost.

11.a device that regulates or directs progressive motion or action: a sewing-machine guide.

12.a spirit believed to direct the utterances of a medium.

13.Military. a member of a group marching in formation who sets the pattern of movement or alignment for the rest.

[---MAD---]

guide
–verb (used with object)

1.to assist (a person) to travel through, or reach a destination in, an unfamiliar area, as by accompanying or giving directions to the person: He guided us through the forest.

2.to accompany (a sightseer) to show points of interest and to explain their meaning or significance.

3.to force (a person, object, or animal) to move in a certain path.

4.to supply (a person) with advice or counsel, as in practical or spiritual affairs.

5.to supervise (someone's actions or affairs) in an advisory capacity. –noun

6.a person who guides, esp. one hired to guide travelers, tourists, hunters, etc.

7.a mark, tab, or the like, to catch the eye and thus provide quick reference.

8.a guidebook.

9.a book, pamphlet, etc., giving information, instructions, or advice; handbook: an investment guide.

10.a guidepost.

11.a device that regulates or directs progressive motion or action: a sewing-machine guide.

12.a spirit believed to direct the utterances of a medium.

13.Military. a member of a group marching in formation who sets the pattern of movement or alignment for the rest.

Well explained. Moderation cannot be done out of a book. It sometimes requires judgement calls .

[jrh2002]

It is also strict due to the fact a moderator not following the guide could end up or in trouble or them being removed from the moderation team as some of you well know

[Orangeesh]

It is also strict due to the fact a moderator not following the guide could end up or in trouble or them being removed from the moderation team as some of you well know

i bet u popped a bottle of champagne when u saw that thread

[bo$$]

There is a lot of rules and they are all fair.

If they are so fair, then why is there such a large amount of people complaining?
I never said that HxF rules are ALL crap.. I just think that this rule should be lightened. There have been people who are joking, and get warned/infracted for it which is crap.

Well this was talked about quite a long time ago and particuarly in the spam section lots of members jokingly abuse each other and this was recognised as just being fun and not penalised in any way. Calling somebody a liar and meaning it however is not nice at all and there are other ways of taking people to task. Why call Earthquake a liar when you could have just asked him why he had contradicted himself and put the link? It would have served the same purpose and not got a penalty.

Moderation is all about common sense at the end of the day and it sounds like the rules are being applied too harshly on occasions but the only way to sort this I believe is to post in the infractions complaints section as it soon becomes apparant where there is a problem with understanding and applying the rules and it can be dealt with further advice, training etc.

This is what I don't get though... so if I would have said "Well Earthquake, I believe that you contradicted your previous statement with this: -provides link-" I wouldn't have been warned..? Why not? It's the exact same thing except there's a link..
Why is it that if I say the exact same thing, except leave out the word "liar", I don't get warned?

Can I name a scammer without saying the word scam and not get warned?

If you post a link that proves they are telling lies I dont see a reason why you cant call them a liar But just to call them a liar with no proof is wrong.

Its not the moderators fault as they are following a strict moderation guide. Maybe the rules could get altered if you can show proof.

Don't go off calling ppl liars and showing proof on my say so though because this is just my own personal opinion

You're someone who makes sense. The thing is though, it seems like majority of the Moderators enjoy how it is now and just love handing out those infractions.

There are possitive and neggative aspects to this.

The possitive aspects that it keeps Habbox under stern control and doesn't get the whole forum out of hand- which is the basis to moderation.

The bad thing that it is sometimes too harsh, but if you feel that an infraction wasn't posted against you in the wrong way- then you can always battle against it in an infraction problem thread.

1- HabboxForum isn't under stern control.. and chances are, it'll never be under stern control.
2- Most of the infractions that are requested to be reversed, don't actually get reversed

[GommeInc]

Either your rules are too harsh or opensourcehost is WAY too obsessed with giving me infractions.

Here's the situation:
Thread 1:
Earthquake: I bully on unpopular kids
Me: -insert w/e i said here-

Thread 2:
Earthquake: I'm really a nice guy. I often talk to the unpopular kids and even act as if I'm struggling with work so I can talk to them
Me: Liar. In the other thread you said that you bully on unpopular kids

Maybe it's just me, but I think that the whole "DO NOT ACCUSE ANYONE OF LYING" rule is stupid.. especially since I didn't say anything like "O YOU LIED YOU SCAMMED HIM U LIAR U HACKED".
I doubt that I would have been infracted if I left out the word "Liar"...
I don't see the big difference

HxF staff should either change the rule so that it isn't so harsh (such as in my situation.. I get infracted for something riduclous) and only infract people for SERIOUS accusations.. or just chill the hell out once in awhile.

What really cracked me up was the reasoning behind the infraction:
"Accusing/naming anyone of lying/scamming/hacking or any other bad things."

I completely agree. I got accused of telling someone they were lying when they obviously were and for some strange, irrational reason, Habbox want you to play along.

Also, Catzy, pointing out someones contradicting statements has served as lying. It did for me at least

[Catzsy]

[Quote] LiquidAciidOR="darkolivegreen"][B]This is what I don't get though... so if I would have said "Well Earthquake, I believe that you contradicted your previous statement with this: -provides link-" I wouldn't have been warned..? Why not? It's the exact same thing except there's a link..
Why is it that if I say the exact same thing, except leave out the word "liar", I don't get warned?

Because you are asking him to explain his contradiction and he may well have had some reasonable answer for it. By doing this you are asking to explain an action and not attacking him personally by calling him a liar which is against the rules , with or without proof Jrh, unless the rules have changed. But it seems to be agreed by all the management that commonsense should be applied so referring to the infraction complaint section means that the Forum Smods/Management can essentially do a quality control check on the standard of moderation. I still think, maybe that there should be more emphasis on guidance than the persuit of mod logs that some mods may feel obliged to get. If that is not the case then the mods should be told that they are here to help as well as enforce the rules. I hate the word punish in any event but that's a personal opinion.

[GhostFace-]

i 110% agree with LiquidAciid some rules are so childish. ive gotten so many infractions, & alot of em were for childish reasons.

y cant somebody fix up some of the rules, keep the forum a bit more mature.

[:-:Mariah:-:]

the moderation system turned crap when mad took over it's TRUE believe a sistA