Why aren't we told?

[JakeWillow]

I may be qouting someone, i do not know for sure, I cba to read all the comments, But look at it like this, if you were to be banned, or Firedwould you like them to announce it over the whole radio? Surely you wouldn't want that, and be embarassed that you were banned from a habbo fansite. thats just my guess as to why they dont come right out and tell about banns, Fires etc.

[JerseySafety]

Rumours went around when I got fired yaaay, I think ban reasons should be given to everyone and 'firing reasons' given to everyone if they have said its ok.

[GommeInc]

In irl, Gomme people are not given the reasons why people are fired from a company. If there has been a problem with hacking or keylogging in the past on the forum as far as I remember the members have been alerted and suggestions made to change their password however I can only ever remember one instance where somebody with admin actually abused their powers in this way and that was a long time ago.

It happens all the time :S Look at news articles revolving around a member of staff being kicked out or removed from a position. I think the HP CEO got kicked out of their position for generally being a bit of a twit It happens more often in the social-community sector e.g. Facebook, Tom(?) from Myspace. Considering Habbox works in the social industry, it's bound to have people wanting to know the ins and outs, and in a way you should let people know the inner workings as you are running a community and as a community members are going to be curious. Heck, users on here seem to discuss Habbox in depth in other places like ClubHabbo or MSN. Management and staff seem so secretive it's uncomfortable. It's a Habbo fansite afterall, not a conglomerate making lots of money. Whatever happened to acting like a not-for-profit business that aims on making a strong, friendly community?

But as I said, it depends on the situation and its mostly in the presentation. Provided you release basic information and make it clear that you cannot tell members exactly what's going on, you should be fine. Recent events highlight when PR goes wrong, a them-and-us mentality isn't inviting, especially on a socio-community website

[Catzsy]

It happens all the time :S Look at news articles revolving around a member of staff being kicked out or removed from a position. I think the HP CEO got kicked out of their position for generally being a bit of a twit It happens more often in the social-community sector e.g. Facebook, Tom(?) from Myspace. Considering Habbox works in the social industry, it's bound to have people wanting to know the ins and outs, and in a way you should let people know the inner workings as you are running a community and as a community members are going to be curious. Heck, users on here seem to discuss Habbox in depth in other places like ClubHabbo or MSN. Management and staff seem so secretive it's uncomfortable. It's a Habbo fansite afterall, not a conglomerate making lots of money. Whatever happened to acting like a not-for-profit business that aims on making a strong, friendly community?

But as I said, it depends on the situation and its mostly in the presentation. Provided you release basic information and make it clear that you cannot tell members exactly what's going on, you should be fine. Recent events highlight when PR goes wrong, a them-and-us mentality isn't inviting, especially on a socio-community website

But the fact remains that whilst the news gets out it is not normal protocol for companies to
issue statements to staff as to who has been fired and why. The part in bold has very little to do with anything. I don't think 'non profit' organisations in irl who have the same ethos do it either but it is nice to see that you appreciate that Habbox does allow users at least allow users to discuss things that could possibly make management uncomfortable. Curiosity is fine but essentially 'crucifying' banned or fired members by making their deeds or misdeeds public is not imo. If they want to let members know the reasons then that shows they wish to make it public is up to them.

[GommeInc]

But the fact remains that whilst the news gets out it is not normal protocol for companies to
issue statements to staff as to who has been fired and why. The part in bold has very little to do with anything. I don't think 'non profit' organisations in irl who have the same ethos do it either but it is nice to see that you appreciate that Habbox does allow users at least allow users to discuss things that could possibly make management uncomfortable. Curiosity is fine but essentially 'crucifying' banned or fired members by making their deeds or misdeeds public is not imo. If they want to let members know the reasons then that shows they wish to make it public is up to them.

The business world isn't black and white Some do, some don't. Most, strangely, issue statements, because sackings usually are the result of a break in contract, so to release a statement on why they were fired is in fact an example of a term within a contract being broken - it sets an example to current employees. Employees are disposable at the end of the day so it means very little to the company of the feelings of those sacked. But thats neither here nor their because the bit in bold is precisely the area Habbox works. It's social website at the end of the day, and presentation and treatment of the people you're serving and serving you are of the utmost importance

You're completely missing my point and seem to be justifying the recent, poor decisions made by some members of management. If you do not want people to know why someone was fired, be honest and say it's not fair for the member to have the reasons disclosed. Surely this is fine? It's not fine, however, to splash petrol over the sparks of speculation which happened in the thread about Mr-Trainor - by saying "You do not know what happened and do not need to know" because such a statement begs the response "Why?" You could cut the crap and simply state in response to future threads "We do not want to disclose this information because it's not fair for the person in question". You could state names or just say "them/him" etc. It's so simple. It's why pointless arguments exist on here because management seem to love speculation and do very little to dispell it :/

[Inseriousity.]

And then people would quite rightly moan that general management were robots. Both statements still begs the response "Why?" because both statements don't answer the question 'why wasx fired'? and there is no getting around that. Pointless arguments exist because people like to argue over trivial things thathave no realconsequence to their life.

[Catzsy]

The business world isn't black and white Some do, some don't. Most, strangely, issue statements, because sackings usually are the result of a break in contract, so to release a statement on why they were fired is in fact an example of a term within a contract being broken - it sets an example to current employees. Employees are disposable at the end of the day so it means very little to the company of the feelings of those sacked. But thats neither here nor their because the bit in bold is precisely the area Habbox works. It's social website at the end of the day, and presentation and treatment of the people you're serving and serving you are of the utmost importance

You're completely missing my point and seem to be justifying the recent, poor decisions made by some members of management. If you do not want people to know why someone was fired, be honest and say it's not fair for the member to have the reasons disclosed. Surely this is fine? It's not fine, however, to splash petrol over the sparks of speculation which happened in the thread about Mr-Trainor - by saying "You do not know what happened and do not need to know" because such a statement begs the response "Why?" You could cut the crap and simply state in response to future threads "We do not want to disclose this information because it's not fair for the person in question". You could state names or just say "them/him" etc. It's so simple. It's why pointless arguments exist on here because management seem to love speculation and do very little to dispell it :/

I am not justifying any decisions. LOL The part is bold is exactly what I have said. Also as far as 'safety bans' are concerned I don't think there is any secret about them. When someone has asked why I have said 'safety ban' as they haven't broken any rules.

[Yupt]

Surely it should depend on the will of the person in question. If someone was fired then it should be their choice to whether the reason for is announced. Unless, of course, the Management see it inappropriate in certain cases.

[GommeInc]

And then people would quite rightly moan that general management were robots. Both statements still begs the response "Why?" because both statements don't answer the question 'why wasx fired'? and there is no getting around that. Pointless arguments exist because people like to argue over trivial things thathave no realconsequence to their life.

Again, it's all in the presentation And saying "It's not fair to tell you why X has been fired" doesn't beg the response "why" because the statement is self-explanatory - because it "would not be fair"

That said, members could just VM a safety banned / fired / banned user asking why, or a PM. There's no harm in that and I think I've done it once asking where their title went.

I am not justifying any decisions. LOL The part is bold is exactly what I have said. Also as far as 'safety bans' are concerned I don't think there is any secret about them. When someone has asked why I have said 'safety ban' as they haven't broken any rules.

It's just a shame actions speak louder than words. You may say it, but management do not act it out as much as they should.