Say Whaa?

[Inseriousity.]

You don't need to be in a job for 6 months to know if they can handle a heavy workload tbh. Alkaz was Content Manager for less than 15 days and he was promoted to Assistant General Manager (Content) and has been for 10 months now.

[Chippiewill]

You don't need to be in a job for 6 months to know if they can handle a heavy workload tbh. Alkaz was Content Manager for less than 15 days and he was promoted to Assistant General Manager (Content) and has been for 10 months now.

And it would be pointless discussing that now, I am only using these incidences as examples. It is entirely possible that he'll be fine, in fact it's probable, it does not change the fact that conditions change and he may have other commitments which are not so much problems right now.

[Sammeth.]

As if this is even an issue. Management make these decisions after carefully looking at all options and have valid reasons. They don't just think "You know what, this will do" and just run with it. I'd let it go as it doesn't really concern you nor does it affect you in the slightest. I'm sure that the staff that were overlooked this time around are gonna be okay, and if they persevere then at least they can stick with it for the next opportunity and they have even more time to prove themselves.

[Chippiewill]

As if this is even an issue. Management make these decisions after carefully looking at all options and have valid reasons. They don't just think "You know what, this will do" and just run with it. I'd let it go as it doesn't really concern you nor does it affect you in the slightest. I'm sure that the staff that were overlooked this time around are gonna be okay, and if they persevere then at least they can stick with it for the next opportunity and they have even more time to prove themselves.

9/10 it'll all work out fine, it's the 1/10 that concerns me.

I'd let it go as it doesn't really concern you nor does it affect you in the slightest.

Not in this instance, but in others it is entirely possible. Again, I am using these as examples to prevent this happening in future, not so that these ones can be changed.

[HotelUser]

Another thing I want to point out (which I don't think a lot of people realize) is that, really, we are and always have been like any other online forum when it comes to promotions. In the past there's been a stint where not only did general management promote who they thought were best suited for the job, but any threads retaining to questioning the legitimacy of the promotion got swiftly locked.

Be thankful that you can get away with complaining about such decisions these days, anyway. Especially considering how inconclusive they really are. No, you or anybody else isn't completely left in the dark but do you really know why, for instance, Shar resigned from Habbox in the first place before just about everyone jumped on the insult bandwagon? In the case of Jordan, how do you know there aren't super staff axe murders who couldn't be hired (and I'm not saying anyone is an axe murder that's strictly an example).

General management, as they always have and will continue to do so, promote who they believe will do the job the best. This isn't the Sims. They can't accommodate and appease everyone and every staffmember and they shouldn't have to. They should strive to do what will make Habbox function the best, and make management decisions which are in the best interest for Habbox, not allow that vision to be compromised because someone's upset that they didn't get promoted

[xxMATTGxx]

9/10 it'll all work out fine, it's the 1/10 that concerns me.


Not in this instance, but in others it is entirely possible. Again, I am using these as examples to prevent this happening in future, not so that these ones can be changed.

It would depend on the situation at the time, you can't promise not do something like this again in the future. Considering we don't think it was a bad decision to do this. Although, different people will get promotions from time to time, each department have their own staff and the situations aren't the same.

[Recursion]

I'd just like to point out, especially in the forum department, people don't get things right, despite reading all the provided information until we actually have to put the knowledge into use on a "real world" thread or post, and when we aren't sure or get something wrong superior staff are always willing to help us out, so in that sense I don't see how you can possibly argue that someone isn't ready. If that person shows willingness, experience and above all, some common sense, they may well be perfect for the job as it is.

[Hecktix]

I think this is something we need to iron out and we need to iron it out pretty sharpish. I'm going to say the following once, and once only:

No decisions regarding Habbox Managerial Positions are rushed - in any manner.

It takes hours if not days for General Management to decide on an (Assistant) Departmental Manager unless there is a glaringly obvious choice (that's to General Management - not the public). I'm afraid that the bottom line is, Habbox is not a democracy and I'm gonna sound a total ass saying this, but it's ultimately the General Manager's decision who to hire as a Manager and we the AGM team contribute where appropriate and sometimes your opinion may vary from that of the GM team, who have a lot of experience within all the departments and have generally managed departments themselves, therefore they know the qualities required.

There's no set criteria for a Manager, we choose the person who we believe will do the Department justice, that's not always necessarily the person who had been there the longest or been online the most etc. I'm not saying General Management get it right every time, that's not true but what is wrong is people jumping down our throats immediately when decisions are made - when you know nothing about how capable or well a certain member may act in their role, as they've been in it less than 5 minutes.

This is something we need to stamp out, yes, naturally some people are going to be unhappy with certain appointments and that's the way it always has been and always will be - however what has never been allowed at Habbox is this public tearing apart of new managers - it's a form of bullying and they most definitely aren't going to fulfil their potential if people put them down publicly from the word go. People need to learn to accept that there's a Management structure here at Habbox and the decisions about ranks come from the top and those decisions are final.

As everybody should know, feedback (including complaints) is always welcome at Habbox however only if the complaints are valid, we assure you that no managerial decisions are rushed and you have to trust us on that, because making a complaint about a certain person being put in a certain role (especially in public) holds no validity. You are entitled to your opinion but before you complain you should find some evidence and facts that this person is not a good manager and to do that they need a chance to show it.

The reason these threads get closed is because they break the forum rules, particularly this one:

A1. Respect other forum members ~ Always respect other forum members, this means do not be rude towards them and respect their opinions. You should not bully or victimise other members for any reason and you should not behave in a negative manner excessively.

Members opinions are always listened to here at Habbox, at least a lot more than in the past and everybody knows that.

On top of this, the fact you are questioning the re-hiring of one of the best Forum Super Moderators Habbox has seen in recent times makes me question your motives behind posting threads such as this.

Anyway, Thread Closed - and if you want to know why, read rule A1.