What a great idea! Your really catching on!

This is a great topic! The rules for the comments often are neglected in the forums.

There should be slighty edited versions for the Questions About Scratch, Help With Scripts and Annoucments. There are a lot of necroposts happening that look like
For demonstration purposes only. Don't remove this ST :P

move () rhd steps
turrrrrrrn cw () degrees
pen down
sides
when [fuef v] key presed
play sound [ya v] wait unti <>

and I even see new posts with that kind of thing. I find that we may need stickies on those forums, but how many peopld read stickies? Only a few (other than scratchblocks testing because that sounds fun).

Something I notice - a lot of people often use the following reason for why they don't support a topic: “It doesn't seem as important as other things.” I don't think this is very constructive, because the suggestion shouldn't be judged on how high-priority it is, but on whether or not it would improve the site in even a minor way.

stickfiregames wrote:

Deerleg wrote:

Oh, and add “Don't use Scratchblocks.”

It depends on the situation

when <I see this suggestion :: custom>
add [stickfiregames] to [supporters v]
wait until <[scratch v] contains (this suggestion)?>
forever
say [yay they added it] for {forever} secs
end

is spam and not really helpful. But

Good idea, but I think it would be better as one block like this:

turn turbo mode [on v] :: control

is constructive because it helps to illustrate the blocks, and doesn't overuse them. Maybe change it to “Don't use scratchblocks spam”.

Oh yes, besides being annoying, it takes a long time to read the nonsense of Scratchblocks sentences. The only two places where this is acceptable is in a signature or in the Scratchblocks testing forum topic. As for the last part of the post about good uses of Scratchblocks…I have used those in the past for my “change width and height separately” suggestion and they made my topic a TON easier to read.

About the post itself, I don't think I've ever seen a New Scratcher get stickied!

Deerleg wrote:

Oh, and add “Don't use Scratchblocks.”

Let me rephrase that in a better: “Use Scratchblocks only for constructive or demonstration purposes only. Using them randomly will only annoy others”.
@CosmicSans: Also, write this advice in a positive tone? When you say “don't” to peoples they tend to do it. It's more helpful when the tone is positive because it affects people positively.

Awesome!

Yes! I agree! It is kinda like bullying and nobody wants that! instead you should be kind and suggest to them how to make it a tiny bit better!

CosmicSans wrote:

stickfiregames wrote:

I agree with all of this except

CosmicSans wrote:

Saying “support” and “no support” don't really help the discussion unless you're providing good points about the topic.

Yes it does, it shows how popular/unpopular the suggestion is.

True, but are the scratch team going to listen to 10 random people who don't say anything but “no support” or “support”, or are they going to listen to someone who gives evidence and proof that their side is correct? People telling why they are saying support or no support helps the discussion.

I guess I will change it to "Saying nothing but ‘no support’ and ‘support’ doesn't really help […]"

“Support” or “no support” is by itself evidence that people do or don't want something added. It's sort of related to what Aonymous said: a common reason given for why people don't support something is that they think not enough people would make use of it. Of course, that's only one point; other reasons can override it.

you know how

set [ v] to [ ]

has a drop down thing?
you should add that to the “more blocks” menu and have the ability to change what drops down.

I wish CosmicSans could extend their post to include avoiding certain rationale for and against common suggestions. Maybe a mod can edit this in so we don't have to squeeze in another sticky?

Avoid making these kinds of arguments

• Support. [no reasoning] - It isn't recommended to leave your post devoid of any reason. People, including the ST, get bugged when posts consist of this one word because it doesn't help to show that the author knows why they support. If there is aught worth mentioning about the idea, do add it to your post.
  
  
• Support, because why not? - Do not rhetorically ask for counter-arguments without providing your own argument first. Just because you cannot find a reason against something does not mean there are no reasons against it.
  
  
• Support, would really help. - In what ways does it help, what problem(s) does it solve? Can the same solution be found with what we already have, and how difficult is it to reach? Be sure to recognize the benefit(s) of an idea and the problem(s) without it.
  
  
• No support. [no reasoning] - If you choose to not give any counterarguments, your entire post is worthless. The least you can do is point to a post with reasoning that you align yourself to, but never be a yay-or-nay person without any reason.
  
  
• No support, why? - Do not beg the question about the purpose of a suggestion if its reasons are already stated, because it shows you are not acknowledging them. Please check other posts for arguments that you can address.
  
  
• No support, useless. - Every suggestion has a reason behind it, whether stated or not. While you may not see the use of something, someone else might/will. Cynicism isn't healthy if you're shutting out every idea that doesn't fit your vision of Scratch, so keep an open mind about things and understand that nothing is ever useless.
  
  
• No support, too confusing for New Scratchers. - Scratch needs to have a low floor (easy to understand) and a high ceiling (can be used to create anything). Rejecting blocks because one finds them confusing, or might find them confusing according to a noob, is not a complete and valid argument. Confusion caused by a lack of knowledge in related subjects is normal to occur, which is why blocks such as the transcendental functions are included, and thus does not merit an argument. Confusion caused by the specialization of a process is valid itself, but given it is clear that most people, not just New Scratchers, are confused by it. Confusion caused by a lack of clarity in the OP's suggestion necessitates a request for more detail before a re-argumentation (ask nicely for a better description instead of immediately rejecting).
  
  
• No support, could be abused. - Everything can be abused, but does that mean every new idea must be rejected because of it? No, do not make this argument ever unless there is obvious intent for abuse, such as for private messaging (see rejected ideas list). By making this argument, you are implying that you don't see absolutely any benefit from an idea, and that is quite ignorant.
  
  
• No support, would cause spam. - Abuse in the form of spam is inevitable, but it should not be the sole reason to prevent new ideas from surfacing. This is like saying, “we shouldn't have forums/Scratch because people spam on it” - your argument goes nowhere fast and you get lost in absolute cynicism. Instead of rejecting an idea because of the spam it brings, introduce ways to regulate and minimize the spam.
  
  
• No support, bad idea. - First, what makes it a “bad idea”? Don't assume the OP knows what you mean by “bad”. Second, don't insult the OP by calling their idea out as “bad”, and instead argue that it will bring more negative consequences than benefits (do remember to list them too).
  
  
• No support, close this topic before it starts a flame war. - Never tell the OP to close their topic just because you (and others) disagree with it, or that you worry that a potential war of opinions is about to start. This is the suggestions forum where debate is common and usually civilized (so long as participants are willing to keep their cool). Only in the rarest of situations would you ever have to say this, most likely when an idea is backed by religious or political arguments.
  
  
• No support, has workaround. - Don't be hasty to pull out the workaround card on block ideas. Remember that the OP was most likely not aware of the workaround. It makes matters worse to make this your only argument because it quickly becomes a game of “how many blocks can we workaround in Scratch”, which goes further down to “remove this block because it has a workaround”. If Scratch was so low-level that even division had to be worked around with multiplication and subtraction, Scratch would be extremely difficult. So please acknowledge the fact that workarounds are not always the best route to take, especially when an idea obviously makes a process easier and faster than conventional means.
  
  Furthermore, if you must make this argument, always provide the workaround itself in a form anyone can understand. It is dishonorable otherwise.
  
  
• Indifferent. - The field is for playing, not spectating. If you're not part of the game, don't participate. In other words, if you have nothing to say that will contribute to the discussion, do not post.
  

This is a really good guide, and very helpful. Zro716, what you came up with is also really helpful, and I really like it. I can't come up with something that good ever.

Zro716 wrote:

I wish CosmicSans could extend their post to include avoiding certain rationale for and against common suggestions. Maybe a mod can edit this in so we don't have to squeeze in another sticky?

Avoid making these kinds of arguments

• Support. [no reasoning] - It isn't recommended to leave your post devoid of any reason. People, including the ST, get bugged when posts consist of this one word because it doesn't help to show that the author knows why they support. If there is aught worth mentioning about the idea, do add it to your post.
  
  
• Support, because why not? - Do not rhetorically ask for counter-arguments without providing your own argument first. Just because you cannot find a reason against something does not mean there are no reasons against it.
  
  
• Support, would really help. - In what ways does it help, what problem(s) does it solve? Can the same solution be found with what we already have, and how difficult is it to reach? Be sure to recognize the benefit(s) of an idea and the problem(s) without it.
  
  
• No support. [no reasoning] - If you choose to not give any counterarguments, your entire post is worthless. The least you can do is point to a post with reasoning that you align yourself to, but never be a yay-or-nay person without any reason.
  
  
• No support, why? - Do not beg the question about the purpose of a suggestion if its reasons are already stated, because it shows you are not acknowledging them. Please check other posts for arguments that you can address.
  
  
• No support, useless. - Every suggestion has a reason behind it, whether stated or not. While you may not see the use of something, someone else might/will. Cynicism isn't healthy if you're shutting out every idea that doesn't fit your vision of Scratch, so keep an open mind about things and understand that nothing is ever useless.
  
  
• No support, could be abused. - Everything can be abused, but does that mean every new idea must be rejected because of it? No, do not make this argument ever unless there is obvious intent for abuse, such as for private messaging (see rejected ideas list). By making this argument, you are implying that you don't see absolutely any benefit from an idea, and that is quite ignorant.
  
  
• No support, would cause spam. - Abuse in the form of spam is inevitable, but it should not be the sole reason to prevent new ideas from surfacing. This is like saying, “we shouldn't have forums/Scratch because people spam on it” - your argument goes nowhere fast and you get lost in absolute cynicism. Instead of rejecting an idea because of the spam it brings, introduce ways to regulate and minimize the spam.
  
  
• No support, bad idea. - First, what makes it a “bad idea”? Don't assume the OP knows what you mean by “bad”. Second, don't insult the OP by calling their idea out as “bad”, and instead argue that it will bring more negative consequences than benefits (do remember to list them too).
  
  
• No support, close this topic before it starts a flame war. - Never tell the OP to close their topic just because you (and others) disagree with it, or that you worry that a potential war of opinions is about to start. This is the suggestions forum where debate is common and usually civilized (so long as participants are willing to keep their cool). Only in the rarest of situations would you ever have to say this, most likely when an idea is backed by religious or political arguments.
  
  
• No support, has workaround. - Don't be hasty to pull out the workaround card on block ideas. Remember that the OP was most likely not aware of the workaround. It makes matters worse to make this your only argument because it quickly becomes a game of “how many blocks can we workaround in Scratch”, which goes further down to “remove this block because it has a workaround”. If Scratch was so low-level that even division had to be worked around with multiplication and subtraction, Scratch would be extremely difficult. So please acknowledge the fact that workarounds are not always the best route to take, especially when an idea obviously makes a process easier and faster than conventional means.
  
  
• Indifferent. - The field is for playing, not spectating. If you're not part of the game, don't participate. (In other words, if you have nothing to say that will contribute to the discussion, do not post.)
  

I agree, but CosmicSans is a New Scratcher for some reason, and can't edit their post. Maybe reporting the post could do the trick?

Deerleg wrote:

CosmicSans wrote:

stickfiregames wrote:

Deerleg wrote:

Oh, and add “Don't use Scratchblocks.”

It depends on the situation

when <I see this suggestion :: custom>
add [stickfiregames] to [supporters v]
wait until <[scratch v] contains (this suggestion)?>
forever
say [yay they added it] for {forever} secs
end

is spam and not really helpful. But

Good idea, but I think it would be better as one block like this:

turn turbo mode [on v] :: control

is constructive because it helps to illustrate the blocks, and doesn't overuse them. Maybe change it to “Don't use scratchblocks spam”.

that is true.

Okay, how about “Don't use Scratchblocks to communicate in a way that you could easily type normally” or something like that.

We should add something like

Don't blockspam
Blockspam is not allowed, and is never really neccesary anyway. If you can easily type something without scratchblocks, please use normal text. It is OK to use scratchblocks in a case like:

Good idea, but I think it would be better as one block like this:

turn turbo mode [on v] :: control

but not, for instance, like:

when <I see this suggestion :: custom>
add [stickfiregames] to [supporters v]
wait until <[scratch v] contains (this suggestion)?>
forever
say [yay they added it] for {forever} secs
end

because there is always another way to clearly support a suggestion.

monstermash3 wrote:

Deerleg wrote:

CosmicSans wrote:

stickfiregames wrote:

Deerleg wrote:

Oh, and add “Don't use Scratchblocks.”

It depends on the situation

when <I see this suggestion :: custom>
add [stickfiregames] to [supporters v]
wait until <[scratch v] contains (this suggestion)?>
forever
say [yay they added it] for {forever} secs
end

is spam and not really helpful. But

Good idea, but I think it would be better as one block like this:

turn turbo mode [on v] :: control

is constructive because it helps to illustrate the blocks, and doesn't overuse them. Maybe change it to “Don't use scratchblocks spam”.

that is true.

Okay, how about “Don't use Scratchblocks to communicate in a way that you could easily type normally” or something like that.

We should add something like

Don't blockspam
Blockspam is not allowed, and is never really neccesary anyway. If you can easily type something without scratchblocks, please use normal text. It is OK to use scratchblocks in a case like:

Good idea, but I think it would be better as one block like this:

turn turbo mode [on v] :: control

but not, for instance, like:

when <I see this suggestion :: custom>
add [stickfiregames] to [supporters v]
wait until <[scratch v] contains (this suggestion)?>
forever
say [yay they added it] for {forever} secs
end

because there is always another way to clearly support a suggestion.

Please don't necropost.

julianandwill wrote:

monstermash3 wrote:

Deerleg wrote:

CosmicSans wrote:

stickfiregames wrote:

Deerleg wrote:

Oh, and add “Don't use Scratchblocks.”

It depends on the situation

when <I see this suggestion :: custom>
add [stickfiregames] to [supporters v]
wait until <[scratch v] contains (this suggestion)?>
forever
say [yay they added it] for {forever} secs
end

is spam and not really helpful. But

Good idea, but I think it would be better as one block like this:

turn turbo mode [on v] :: control

is constructive because it helps to illustrate the blocks, and doesn't overuse them. Maybe change it to “Don't use scratchblocks spam”.

that is true.

Okay, how about “Don't use Scratchblocks to communicate in a way that you could easily type normally” or something like that.

We should add something like

Don't blockspam
Blockspam is not allowed, and is never really neccesary anyway. If you can easily type something without scratchblocks, please use normal text. It is OK to use scratchblocks in a case like:

Good idea, but I think it would be better as one block like this:

turn turbo mode [on v] :: control

but not, for instance, like:

when <I see this suggestion :: custom>
add [stickfiregames] to [supporters v]
wait until <[scratch v] contains (this suggestion)?>
forever
say [yay they added it] for {forever} secs
end

because there is always another way to clearly support a suggestion.

Please don't necropost.

No, this is a sticky, so there is no such thing as necroposting.

Zro716 wrote:

It makes matters worse to make this your only argument because it quickly becomes a game of “how many blocks can we workaround in Scratch”, which goes further down to “remove this block because it has a workaround”.

That has happened so much… sometimes it even turns into a flame war.

monstermash3 wrote:

Deerleg wrote:

CosmicSans wrote:

stickfiregames wrote:

Deerleg wrote:

Oh, and add “Don't use Scratchblocks.”

It depends on the situation

when <I see this suggestion :: custom>
add [stickfiregames] to [supporters v]
wait until <[scratch v] contains (this suggestion)?>
forever
say [yay they added it] for {forever} secs
end

is spam and not really helpful. But

Good idea, but I think it would be better as one block like this:

turn turbo mode [on v] :: control

is constructive because it helps to illustrate the blocks, and doesn't overuse them. Maybe change it to “Don't use scratchblocks spam”.

that is true.

Okay, how about “Don't use Scratchblocks to communicate in a way that you could easily type normally” or something like that.

We should add something like

Don't blockspam
Blockspam is not allowed, and is never really neccesary anyway. If you can easily type something without scratchblocks, please use normal text. It is OK to use scratchblocks in a case like:

Good idea, but I think it would be better as one block like this:

turn turbo mode [on v] :: control

but not, for instance, like:

when <I see this suggestion :: custom>
add [stickfiregames] to [supporters v]
wait until <[scratch v] contains (this suggestion)?>
forever
say [yay they added it] for {forever} secs
end

because there is always another way to clearly support a suggestion.

Yes!

For what Zro said about the: “No support, workaroundable” thing:

Could you possibly add something about people leaving it blank after saying that.

If you say there is a workaround, then instead of leaving it blank, POST the workaround, it is disrespectful to say something like that because you literally just left them in the dust almost implying that they aren't “smart” and should learn some more Scratch. That's how I would feel if someone said that.

I like #1. It's funny.