I understand that minor remixes are allowed, because little kids and the majority of people new to the website would get sad/angry if their projects were removed even if they tried to change what they could to their knowledge of the editor.

However, I see absolutely no reason at all to allow extremely minor remixes to be allowed. A lot of people agree that it's annoying to have some person who changes nearly nothing on your project and gets away with it simply because they didn't click share straight after they clicked remix.

I know that you're either thinking ‘what’s the definition of extremely minor?' or 'Sigh… another person who didn't read the rejected suggestions list…'
Well here are three examples:

A SHORT PROJECT:
Before: Scratch Cat colour- Orange
After: Scratch Cat colour- Red

A PLATFORMER PROJECT:
Before:

if <touching [coin v]> then
change [Coins v] by (1)

After:

if <touching [coin v]> then
change [Coins v] by (2)

AN ANIMATION PROJECT:
Before:

say [Hello] for (2) secs

Before:

say [Hi] for (2) secs

(I bet that there is going to be someone who goes and exaggerates these examples.)

Mind that, for each of the examples, they were the ONLY minor thing that was changed in the entire project. This is the type of extremely minor remix I am talking about. If people aren't bothered to put a grain of effort in when remixing, then they don't deserve to remix at all.

What's the real problem with these remixes? They do absolutely nothing wrong.
That's why it has been rejected:

jvvg wrote:

14. Banning minor remixes
Remixes are allowed as long as at least something is changed, even if it's minor.

Sigton

Sigton wrote:

What's the real problem with these remixes? They do absolutely nothing wrong.
That's why it has been rejected:

jvvg wrote:

14. Banning minor remixes
Remixes are allowed as long as at least something is changed, even if it's minor.

Sigton

Yes they do - they change nothing of the code of the project, simply values within. This does not count as a change, but instead a revalued copy, in my books. However, I have gotten a minor remix beyond the OP's complexity removed via report (all they did was change all the values so the project worked the same, but they also broke the project by remixing a cloud engine (To attempt to use the variable) as a New Scratcher.) as what they did to the project I found offensive and demeaning of my time.

braxbroscratcher wrote:

Yes they do - they change nothing of the code of the project, simply values within. This does not count as a change, but instead a revalued copy, in my books. However, I have gotten a minor remix beyond the OP's complexity removed via report (all they did was change all the values so the project worked the same, but they also broke the project by remixing a cloud engine (To attempt to use the variable) as a New Scratcher.) as what they did to the project I found offensive and demeaning of my time.

Did they pass it off as their own though? Cause if they didn't, especially if they gave you credit, then they have every right to remix your project. For all you know they might've just been using it as a project to learn from and experiment with, so they could see how it works.
You just assumed that they're trying to steal your work.

Sigton

Sigton wrote:

What's the real problem with these remixes? They do absolutely nothing wrong.
That's why it has been rejected:

jvvg wrote:

14. Banning minor remixes
Remixes are allowed as long as at least something is changed, even if it's minor.

Sigton

The point I'm trying to make is that, copy remixes and extremely minor remixes are practially the same thing, and there's no point in having remixing if all we do is duplicate the project with a change so small that few people will realise. I understand if ‘extremely minor’ looks like an exaggeration of ‘minor’, but I do mean ‘extremely’ here.

Most minor remixes are a Scratcher's first project. You can't ban a project just because it's bad. The motto of scratch is: Imagine - Program - Share.
If you don't want to share then don't go on Scratch.

Support. If they are really minor changes like the ones you suggested.

23halvok wrote:

Most minor remixes are a Scratcher's first project. You can't ban a project just because it's bad. The motto of scratch is: Imagine - Program - Share.
If you don't want to share then don't go on Scratch.

Bad is a pretty broad term. Could you be more specific?
A remix is designed so that the user can build off of people's project and help encourage creative building and continuation of a project. However, Scratch does encourage people to be constructive and preserve the respect a project deserves. So I do get it when people say that it's not very respectful to make a very minor change that barely anyone notices it.

FYI @dave4681 you have a typo in your OP.

Perhaps I must be more specific: I bet THEIR is going to be…
just kidding.

23halvok wrote:

Most minor remixes are a Scratcher's first project. You can't ban a project just because it's bad. The motto of scratch is: Imagine - Program - Share.
If you don't want to share then don't go on Scratch.

You've noticed that minor remixes comply with the 3rd word, but you've not noticed that it doesn't comply with the 1st word nor the 2nd?

DownsGameClub wrote:

FYI @dave4681 you have a typo in your OP.

Thanks, I've fixed it

dave4681 wrote:

DownsGameClub wrote:

FYI @dave4681 you have a typo in your OP.

Thanks, I've fixed it

Welp, I got ninjad.

Seems like it's not going to happen based on the stickies (which should be read before suggesting anything).

Yes, I support.
Scratch involves being imaginative and programming. If you're just going to remix something and put literally no effort into it, then you should not remix it whatsoever. People should be putting effort into their projects. If they're just changing a simple value or colour, they're not learning how to program; they're just changing around a bit of text. If it's a recolour, it should at least be a creative recolour, and not simply just one colour change, or even worse, everything changed to one colour.
I also think that people should no longer be allowed to post remixes where they just purposely ruin the original project (ex: changing all the sprites to scribbles, etc.), as they can be considered offensive, and also take absolutely no effort.

23halvok wrote:

Most minor remixes are a Scratcher's first project. You can't ban a project just because it's bad. The motto of scratch is: Imagine - Program - Share.
If you don't want to share then don't go on Scratch.

I haven't actually seen many minor remixes as a person's first project. However, if it's EXTREMELY minor, then it should be removed as no effort is put in whatsoever. If you're making your first project, odds are you shouldn't remix and instead create your own from scratch, learning what things do along the way. It's common sense. Also, let's bold the important parts here in the Scratch motto: Imagine - Program - Share. Yes, you should share, but if you're not being imaginative or programming during your remixes, then it shouldn't be allowed.

Firedrake969 wrote:

Seems like it's not going to happen based on the stickies (which should be read before suggesting anything).

They said that they've read the stickies, however this is for EXTREMELY minor remixes, and they give some good points.

Sigton wrote:

What's the real problem with these remixes? They do absolutely nothing wrong.
That's why it has been rejected:

jvvg wrote:

14. Banning minor remixes
Remixes are allowed as long as at least something is changed, even if it's minor.

Although they don't seem to do anything wrong, the projects are quite insulting. Just think that they just changed one tiny thing and it counts as its own separate project. It doesn't seem that fair, does it?

Sigton wrote:

braxbroscratcher wrote:

Yes they do - they change nothing of the code of the project, simply values within. This does not count as a change, but instead a revalued copy, in my books. However, I have gotten a minor remix beyond the OP's complexity removed via report (all they did was change all the values so the project worked the same, but they also broke the project by remixing a cloud engine (To attempt to use the variable) as a New Scratcher.) as what they did to the project I found offensive and demeaning of my time.

Did they pass it off as their own though? Cause if they didn't, especially if they gave you credit, then they have every right to remix your project. For all you know they might've just been using it as a project to learn from and experiment with, so they could see how it works.
You just assumed that they're trying to steal your work.

Sigton

This is a good point here. If the remixer gave credit, then it might even be beneficial to the original maker.

dave4681 wrote:

A lot of people agree that it's annoying to have some person who changes nearly nothing on your project and gets away with it simply because they didn't click share straight after they clicked remix.

I would take it as a complement, if the person bothered to remix your project, it means they like it/want to learn about it. Think about it, would you remix a project you don't like?

Edit: If it wasn't clear, no support. Sorry

This is already rejected but I do support. There are too many remixes of popular projects that simply change the player icon to an uglier hand-drawn version or just change the title or even just scribble on the screen. This isn't being creative, it's using other people to try and get famous.

Here's my two cents:

A. I think there's a difference between not crediting someone and making a minor remix. Because either one person is crediting them and changing little, or they're not crediting and changing very little. That is the problem, and that is already against the rules.

B. What's wrong with this? I can experiement with different values in a shared remix? Is that wrong? How is it wrong to test things and learn?

This seems to be very bad at countering the actual arguments of the Scratch motto. If you want something added, you might want to make sure it's compatible with the Scratch motto.

EDIT: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon

WolfCat67 wrote:

Sigton wrote:

What's the real problem with these remixes? They do absolutely nothing wrong.
That's why it has been rejected:

jvvg wrote:

14. Banning minor remixes
Remixes are allowed as long as at least something is changed, even if it's minor.

Although they don't seem to do anything wrong, the projects are quite insulting. Just think that they just changed one tiny thing and it counts as its own separate project. It doesn't seem that fair, does it?

does it detract from your project though?

Sigton wrote:

braxbroscratcher wrote:

Yes they do - they change nothing of the code of the project, simply values within. This does not count as a change, but instead a revalued copy, in my books. However, I have gotten a minor remix beyond the OP's complexity removed via report (all they did was change all the values so the project worked the same, but they also broke the project by remixing a cloud engine (To attempt to use the variable) as a New Scratcher.) as what they did to the project I found offensive and demeaning of my time.

Did they pass it off as their own though? Cause if they didn't, especially if they gave you credit, then they have every right to remix your project. For all you know they might've just been using it as a project to learn from and experiment with, so they could see how it works.
You just assumed that they're trying to steal your work.

Sigton

Yes. Even when the remix tab was already there lol. I asked for credit from them and they're like no u stupid I made dis
when I was like, dude, look below the notes and credits. It says I made the original, and you didn't credit me. It's rude.
He's like ‘reported for bullying’… to which I responded:
Reported.

If you seriously care about this topic, please take note: It is absolutely legally allowable for anybody to do anything with your project under the terms of the CC license - and this not only includes “extremely minor remixing,” but also direct redistribution.

The only reason people don't seem to be concerned about this is because direct redistribution is not hosted on the Scratch website - but it is still legally allowed, meaning I can compile your Scratch project and sell it as a commercial game, as long as I say “credit to <you>” and share “my” source files.

Of course, this doesn't mean that we can't ban minor remixes as well - my only reason to bring it up is to make sure that everybody here understands that the Scratch website's rules are actually legally meaningless in terms of what people can do with your project.

And yes, a problem that needs to be addressed is what qualifies as “extremely minor.” In procedural art-type projects, changing a single value can have a massive effect on the outcome. Replacing every graphic with a scribble could also be very much legitimate, in a sort of “ms-paint-ifying” of a project. Unless you can provide a pretty objective definition of “extremely minor,” I simply can't support a rule like this.

TheMonsterOfTheDeep wrote:

If you seriously care about this topic, please take note: It is absolutely legally allowable for anybody to do anything with your project under the terms of the CC license - and this not only includes “extremely minor remixing,” but also direct redistribution.

The only reason people don't seem to be concerned about this is because direct redistribution is not hosted on the Scratch website - but it is still legally allowed, meaning I can compile your Scratch project and sell it as a commercial game, as long as I say “credit to <you>” and share “my” source files.

Of course, this doesn't mean that we can't ban minor remixes as well - my only reason to bring it up is to make sure that everybody here understands that the Scratch website's rules are actually legally meaningless in terms of what people can do with your project.

And yes, a problem that needs to be addressed is what qualifies as “extremely minor.” In procedural art-type projects, changing a single value can have a massive effect on the outcome. Replacing every graphic with a scribble could also be very much legitimate, in a sort of “ms-paint-ifying” of a project. Unless you can provide a pretty objective definition of “extremely minor,” I simply can't support a rule like this.

I've already given 3