When a game has been downloaded hundreds of times, you might be forgiven for thinking it’s an acceptable gesture.

But what about when you’re just playing a game and you get a message from your friends asking if you want to join their club?

The answer to that question may well depend on whether you have an official Facebook or Twitter account.

Facebook users are now legally allowed to use a nag to mark someone as a member of their club, according to the UK’s highest court.

The ruling in the Supreme Court of England and Wales comes as part of an ongoing case involving a group of players who want to use the feature.

The players, who are all in their early 20s, want to mark players in a multiplayer game as members of their team.

They say the feature violates the players’ rights to free speech.

The players have argued that a player must be invited to join a group, and that a nagging gesture, whether in-game or via social media, can be a legitimate means of letting players know who to support and who not to.

The court agreed with the players, finding that the nagging of someone in a game is “not a form of direct communication” that is “permitted”.

But it also said that a game may not prohibit the use of a nagger if the player had been invited by the other players to join the group.

The Supreme Court ruling will affect all users who have a Facebook account, but there are two exceptions.

If the user was a member at the time of the infringement, they can use the nag and keep the mark.

If they were not a member, they will be banned from using the feature forever.

Facebook’s answerThe court said that since the nags were first introduced in 2011, the social network has done “excellent work” in protecting users from harassment and abuse.

“Facebook is the place where we are all growing up, where we all have conversations, and we all make decisions, and in that way Facebook is the best place for people to be,” said a Facebook spokesperson in a statement.

“While we are committed to protecting people’s right to free expression on our platform, we have always made it clear that a small number of accounts could have been found to be inciting or encouraging the abuse of others.”

This is not the first time the court has ruled in favour of users.

In 2012, a British court ruled that users had the right to use nags as a form, even if it’s not “direct communication”.