Guardian System

santa-my-nana · 22-07-2012, 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by Intersocial

Oh. Hmm, why did I quote you. Oh yes I know why haha.

I completely agree with all of that^. Although there are a minority of 16 year olds who do behave maturely and can uphold a high standard of responsibility, the overall stance is that the large % of them aren't responsible or mentally mature enough to deal with moderating a large community. The UN (I believe it's UN Law, not sure) considers people "adults" at 18 for a very good reason, because that's the average age most people... in a sense "mature" and I don't think a few minorities should bring the limit down to 16.

I wouldn't go as far to make it 21+, I'd say 19+. In the US/CA/AU maybe idk, and idk about SG you will be out of school by the time you're 19. I'd rather not see 16/17/18 year olds throw away their education because they're too busy moderating a virtual community.

I have to agree that there is a minority of people who are 16 and are mature,I see your point about throwing away education but when i go to college in September I will be studying creative media, acting and buisness studies, now i'm going to be while creating my own site (Part of the creative media and buisness studies curriculum) but also part is moderation, so some people may be throwing there education away but some maybe trying to gain one, This sort of stuff should not be determined by age otherwise you are denying those who are mature enough and some who are more mature than some other older users a CHANCE. Lifes about own choices, if someone does not want an education, maybe because its not right for them, should they not be aloud this chance to go for it who feels better suited in a virtual environment or someone like myself who is wanting a chance because of my education. My question is it fair. I think if it did require an age limit you might as well require a formal application process just like any job and a CV, I think a CV speaks for a person a long with a personal statement and record of achievement, this can show you what a person is like a long with how they present them selves.

Originally Posted by Okeanos

A CRB check would prove someone's age and make sure they're not a creepy perv at the same time. But maybe that's a bit too ott. I don't recall any UK hobbas who lied about their age, certainly not any gold/super hobbas.

I'd prefer it to be 21+ because 18 year olds are hardly better than 16 but that will never happen. Obviously people under 18 will disagree but in general they're too petty and silly to be trusted with a position of responsibility. There are exceptions of course, but you have to draw the line somewhere. That said, for all we know guardians might be little better than habbo Xs in which case a minimum age limit wouldnt be needed.

I would say 21+ is a bit hefty, read above what I just said as it links to the majority of this. This last week I have been on a trip with many young people around the country and im living with them again this week, and we are doing community projects in our area, you would not believe how many of them are so mature and they are all under 18, the first week we were doing team building exercisers but this week we are doing the more creative side and building our community project for the good of our community, if you got turned away and you knew you were a really good moderator who was really mature but they didnt know about any of the stuff you done, How would you feel?

Bill · 22-07-2012, 11:53 PM

I cannot see there being an age limit on the Guardians. I could be wrong but I don't think guardians will have to provide any identification and I also do not believe there will be a numerical limit on how many there will be. I think a lot of people are going to be very disappointed.

**GommeInc** · 23-07-2012, 12:13 AM

I've sure that goes against a privacy policy somewhere, to allow snitches to go through private conversations to check for bullying. It seems like a system that could be abused and again derails the whole point of the original problem with Habbo, that those paid to do their jobs simply get away with being unaccountable again.

Kardan · 23-07-2012, 01:08 AM

Giving Habbos power with minimal staff supervision means some Habbos will abuse their privileges.

Although the on/off duty thing is handy, would've been nice to have had that in the eXperts program - would turn override on and off aswell

Abdicators · 23-07-2012, 01:10 AM

Originally Posted by Bill

I cannot see there being an age limit on the Guardians. I could be wrong but I don't think guardians will have to provide any identification and I also do not believe there will be a numerical limit on how many there will be. I think a lot of people are going to be very disappointed.

This. I also think some of you are a little too worried about this age thing, Guardians are not going to have the power to review room chat logs, as far as i'm aware the only power they are going to have is to mute, kick and room ban users in the room they have been called too. Any actions they make will have to be based on what they see in the room once they get there.

LiquidLuck. · 23-07-2012, 05:12 AM

Seems pretty cool and I can't wait for the free chat to be back.

atpeak · 23-07-2012, 02:03 PM

I think people are getting way too carried away. Hobbas will never be back like pre 05 because of security and legal reasons. Hobbas were the main moderators of the hotel whilst a staff member would supervise them 24/7. This new Guardian system is a gimmick like the Habbo X team who were pretty much pants, laughed at and most didn't even care about them (nor did the staff), sorry but I'm being brutally honest here.

Hobbas were widely respected by 90% of the community on Habbo (excluding the noob 10%). Their presence in a room would change peoples behavior etc whilst they sat idle with their Gold Hobba badge.

They had powers, real powers: Kick, Room Kick, Ban and Alert, Room override, chatlogs as standard for Gold.

Habbo X's had room override and a badge that meant nothing to others.

Oh yeah who remembers scambusters?

Bob1 · 23-07-2012, 03:49 PM

Sounds like a fairly new take on a very familiar system, I'm intrigued I'll give them that. Personally I still don't think it sounds effective at the moment and can still see obvious problems/old mistakes being remade but wouldn't like to assume based on the small snippets of info.

Originally Posted by atpeak

Oh yeah who remembers scambusters?

LOL...