How about we start sending out nicer PMs when we're being warned.

[Richie]

I think the PM to A.B was totally right to be harsh, because the fact is I even sent you a nice one yesterday for the abuse of the features. You've had a "friendly warning" and in my eyes your subscription would of been removed - or you could of had a warning/infraction so you got off lightly.

Regarding Saurav (saying no one uses the calendar), that's like saying if no one used the forum it would be ok for everyone to go around swearing? would we allow it? no. The rules are set out clear and if you break them you will be contacted (or action taken against you).

If no-one used the forum well then you wouldn't be here to moderate boooooyaaaa!

[GommeInc]

http://www.habboxforum.com/faq.php?f...and_conditions

I guess you should be glad he didn't just remove your subscriptions. Bit silly of you both anyway.

That's a pee-poor reason though. Although it is correct, using that as an excuse in any context like this means that whoever is in charge of such a department hasn't got brains to write up a reason. It's an anti-social approach, you may as well say: "We don't value the lives and opinions of our members, we only like you as a number", and I am sure you don't want another uprising where previous discussions over that have led to Management/Staff/Individuals being blasted for not being creative enough to give a reason.

Now then, although there is no rule for this, you COULD of said:

"Yes, you are correct there is no rule regarding this. However, we ask that you do not add multiple events to the calendar as this makes it look untidy and may annoy other members. We shall let you off for now, but we would like to ask you do not repeat this and we'll create a rule which ensures it doesn't happen in the future. Thanks."

It's better than the "we have in our TOC that we can ban you **** whenever we like, so shurrup."

So I'm with Agnostic Bear here, mainly because something so simple could of been handled alot better.

[Tintinnabulate]

I think the PM to A.B was totally right to be harsh, because the fact is I even sent you a nice one yesterday for the abuse of the features. You've had a "friendly warning" and in my eyes your subscription would of been removed - or you could of had a warning/infraction so you got off lightly.

Regarding Saurav (saying no one uses the calendar), that's like saying if no one used the forum it would be ok for everyone to go around swearing? would we allow it? no. The rules are set out clear and if you break them you will be contacted (or action taken against you).

The rules are set out in a dead forum. Get your facts right dear.

And what pissed me off is Jamesys stinking attitude in this thread. No ******* wonder this forum is dying. The staff are too much up their own ass and love themselves too much.

[Chippiewill]

And what pissed me off is Jamesys stinking attitude in this thread. No ******* wonder this forum is dying. The staff are too much up their own ass and love themselves too much.

Hypocrite.

Also the point is, regardless of whether or not the rule was clear it only takes common sense to realise that spamming the calender isn't allowed.

[immense]

i think there are bigger issues to look at. threads like this should just be closed. habbox isn't a democracy, you shouldn't always be able to complain over a pm.

ironic? probably.

[Chippiewill]

i think there are bigger issues to look at. threads like this should just be closed. habbox isn't a democracy, you shouldn't always be able to complain over a pm.

ironic? probably.

Regardless, they are entitled to an opinion.

[Nixt]

I think the niceties that come with a PM are ultimately dependent on the context of the situation and the individual involved. Sarah has indicated that you had already been reminded of the rule and you are an experienced knowledgeable member with an idea of what is or is not acceptable. In the event that a member knows they aren't to do something, I think a slightly harsher PM makes sense as they have chosen to ignore what is obviously against the rules.

In the event you were an ignorant, new member you would have been dealt with differently, I am sure. But you are not - you were aware and will therefore be dealt with more harshly than you would have been otherwise.

That's exactly why (@ Skizzling) when ever I sent staff warning PMs, they were often quite firm because staff should be fully aware they shouldn't be behaving in certain manners. It's all contextual, and the context of this situation seems to me that a harsher PM is fully justified.

[Chippiewill]

I think the niceties that come with a PM are ultimately dependent on the context of the situation and the individual involved. Sarah has indicated that you had already been reminded of the rule and you are an experienced knowledgeable member with an idea of what is or is not acceptable. In the event that a member knows they aren't to do something, I think a slightly harsher PM makes sense as they have chosen to ignore what is obviously against the rules.

In the event you were an ignorant, new member you would have been dealt with differently, I am sure. But you are not - you were aware and will therefore be dealt with more harshly than you would have been otherwise.

That's exactly why (@ Skizzling) when ever I sent staff warning PMs, they were often quite firm because staff should be fully aware they shouldn't be behaving in certain manners. It's all contextual, and the context of this situation seems to me that a harsher PM is fully justified.

Exactly, in fact I think we've been demanding context dependant punishment for ages. As soon as we get it everyone moans that it's not fair / it's too harsh. Puzzling at best.

[Agnostic Bear]

I even sent you a nice one yesterday for the abuse of the features

It had nothing to do with Jamesy's message which was for "spamming":

Hiya AB,

I have removed a recent event you have added called "no jerking it" as this is not appropriate for the forum let alone events calendar. Please be aware it is against the rules to abuse the features of being VIP set out in the guide thread.

Thanks,

Sarah
Assistant Forum Manager

Now I thought nothing of this message as it wasn't too harsh so I just dealt with it, it was "just right".

However it had nothing to do with setting an alert over 6 years, only "inappropriate" content. My point still stands that I should never have received such a harsh message from Jamesy.

(also no jerking it guys)

also i feel i should point out in large text that i have not, nor will i read the rules, there are too many and too much to read, i'm not talking 10 minutes out of my day to read rules which i have never encountered problems with

[Nixt]

If you choose not to read the rules it's totally your problem - she's talking about inappropriate postings on the calendar, however she does establish there is a guide thread and you obviously failed to read it, so it's really your own fault that you have had to be repeatedly contacted regarding abuse of VIP features which ultimately leads to harsher PMs.

Just my opinion anyway.