Quote from Jordy " RUMOURS ?!? "

[F32]

I think theres a line.

Like people should be able to post saying something like "Hey theres a rumour going around that the *green parasol* is next on sale" without having to provide solid evidence, as it's in relation to Habbo and is a rumour.

If it's something compltely ridiculous and spam, aka "habbo is going to blow up" etc. then I think that can be removed etc. as it's clear it's spam and has no truth or meaning behind it.

Then if Habbo does actually blow up, you're *****ed.

[Jin]

Just to clarify what ostinato said.

News would be something like "Jibbi returns to the hotel after peru" with something like a screenshot of something like "Message from habbo staff: Jibbi is coming back" and a console image of Jibbi online with the mission "I am back"

Rumours would be something like,

"Dionysus might leave Habbo hotel" with something like a screenshot of Dionysus' name not being on the staff list or he had implied it at the soapbox.

The difference being that one item has been confirmed by the party, being Habbo Hotel Ltd, the other hasnt but there is some proof of why this claim had been made but it isnt news because it isnt factual as of yet.

If you look at media they all report on rumours especially in celebrity gossip magazines but it hasnt just been made up because a journalists wife said
"oooo guess what? I think madonna and justin timberlake will get hitched in las vegas"
and a journalist goes and prints the story but because there is some sort of evidence be it not very strong, supporting the claim.

[scubadiva]

I think theres a line.

Like people should be able to post saying something like "Hey theres a rumour going around that the *green parasol* is next on sale" without having to provide solid evidence, as it's in relation to Habbo and is a rumour.

If it's something compltely ridiculous and spam, aka "habbo is going to blow up" etc. then I think that can be removed etc. as it's clear it's spam and has no truth or meaning behind it.

I agree with you there, moderators should just use their discretion (sp?) to decide whether a thread is spam or not.

[e5]

Just to clarify what ostinato said.

News would be something like "Jibbi returns to the hotel after peru" with something like a screenshot of something like "Message from habbo staff: Jibbi is coming back" and a console image of Jibbi online with the mission "I am back"

Rumours would be something like,

"Dionysus might leave Habbo hotel" with something like a screenshot of Dionysus' name not being on the staff list or he had implied it at the soapbox.

The difference being that one item has been confirmed by the party, being Habbo Hotel Ltd, the other hasnt but there is some proof of why this claim had been made but it isnt news because it isnt factual as of yet.

If you look at media they all report on rumours especially in celebrity gossip magazines but it hasnt just been made up because a journalists wife said
"oooo guess what? I think madonna and justin timberlake will get hitched in las vegas"
and a journalist goes and prints the story but because there is some sort of evidence be it not very strong, supporting the claim.

No, A rumour would simply be: " Rumour has it Dionysus is leaving habbo UK "

O and thank you Ostinato

[nvrspk4]

That user defined "rumour" from an outside source. Habbox plainly defines "rumour" as followed:

What is a rumour?
A rumour is information that hasn't been announced publicly by Sulake. You are allowed to post rumours however they must be backed up with evidence. Any evidence which has been edited i.e a staff's speech bubble, could get you into trouble!

Please do not post a rumour if you have no proof!

By registering to Habbox you agreed to follow our Terms and Conditions, and if we want to specify parameters differently than a perfectly good dictionary we reserve the right to.

Now in certain cases, rock solid proof isn't 100% necessary, for example if you use logical reasoning to come to a conclusion. However the decision of whether its logical or not falls to the moderator, so if you do not provide proof it is up to the moderator. Hence that thread, actually gave some reasoning, however by not having any proof at all, it is up to the whim of the moderator.

Therefore, you cannot question the validity of his decision too much. That being said, I don't mean it like, "Oh, the rule is like this and this is how it should stay", however his action based on the current rules was correct, whether those rules should be in place is something you as the members of Habbox have the right to do and what you're doing, however I just wanted to clear up that the decision based on the current rules was not wrong, though if you disagree with it and back up your thinking Forum Managers might rethink it.

[ReviewDude]

Proof, in the Forum's opinion (as pointed out in my thread) is basically a source.

If you post that there's a rumour "Habbo is shutting down" - if you post a screenshot of someone telling you it - it's a rumour. If you include a link, or information as to why you think it's shutting down - it's a rumour.

If you just post "I heard someone says Habbo is shutting down" or "I think Habbo will shut down" it's not a rumour - and will be moved to Anything About Habbo, or locked.

[GommeInc]

Habbox bend the meaning of "Rumour" a little. Habbox has rumour defined as like a probability of chances with some evidence, but not enough to make it certain. For example, "A staff member is leaving" is a rumour if it has been hinted with a name missing on a page, Habbo Home banned etc and the probability is a list of different staff rumoured to be leaving.

If Habbox kept by just having News and Rumours, it will be filled with good news and lots of spam. Habbox has more like a News and Certain Rumours type forum.

[ReviewDude]

Well you don't need specific evidence, for instance if you can prove you've had a lot of console messages about something - or like you say that their name is missing - it's a rumour, and is fine.

What you can't do is make up some elaborate story and not back it up - however flimsily.

[sierk1]

Maybe we should add a rule that rumours posted should be backed up by some kind of justification.

[e5]

yes, but then how is it a rumour

your definition of a rumour needs proof, so if it is not from sulake its not true? i've said it before, if proof is giving then its news