I think that if that many users are “misreading” your post, the problem likely isn't on them, it's on you. I have carefully re-read the whole massive paragraph you keep continuously editing and I have yet to see anything that contradicts the point I have made. You've mentioned in massive bold letters that you already know there's a feature to turn location off yet you have provided no compelling argument for why this isn't satisfactory other than “some users might want more” with no evidence of users who feel that way or reasons why users would find that unsatisfactory. You've also mentioned that you have also never seen anyone be bullied for this however then proceed to talk about how people could be bullied for this as though it is a good reason to remove the feature- people being mocked for their location is literally a part of your argument as to thy the feature should be removed, just because you've mentioned that you also have literally never seen anyone be mocked for this doesn't make you exempt from that criticism, it just makes your argument weaker.
You have also never actually refuted any of the criticisms against your idea or given solutions to any of the issues other users have raised with the exception of things you think qualify as the user having “not read” your argument, which is not compelling evidence to support your argument.

furrypig wrote:

Also, please elaborate on “there is no reason for it to be removed.” Half of the reasons I put in the original post are pro for removing the location feature, so there are certainly reasons. Do you mean you think these reasons aren't good enough?

1. “Pro: What is it used for?” I don't really think this is a reason for it to be removed.
2. “Pro: It's used in statistics, but doesn't need to be on profiles”: It's useful on profiles. It lets people know that you're from that country, and, for example, it lets people know that they're probably not gonna understand what you're talking about if it's something that doesn't exist in their country.
3. “Pro: It has negative effects” I'm not sure many people consider what country they live in as personal information. As for the stereotypes, I've never seen anybody do this (at least in a way meant to offend someone) on Scratch because of this feature. If you see this happen, report it. You mention in big, red text “Also, though it doesn't seem to happen” (which I missed because that section was a bit hard to read, you might want to fix it a bit) but you haven't provided any proof of this - I know this can be hard on Scratch due to the naming and shaming rule but maybe add a quote from a Scratch Team member saying that this is something that happens frequently on Scratch.
4. “Pro: It seems more like a thing for about me” Takes up too much space, especially if your country name is long. This is one of the main reasons why I don't support this suggestion and why I think it is an inconvenience.

TheRealNetherBefore wrote:

I think that if that many users are “misreading” your post, the problem likely isn't on them, it's on you. I have carefully re-read the whole massive paragraph you keep continuously editing and I have yet to see anything that contradicts the point I have made. You've mentioned in massive bold letters that you already know there's a feature to turn location off yet you have provided no compelling argument for why this isn't satisfactory other than “some users might want more” with no evidence of users who feel that way or reasons why users would find that unsatisfactory. You've also mentioned that you have also never seen anyone be bullied for this however then proceed to talk about how people could be bullied for this as though it is a good reason to remove the feature- people being mocked for their location is literally a part of your argument as to thy the feature should be removed, just because you've mentioned that you also have literally never seen anyone be mocked for this doesn't make you exempt from that criticism, it just makes your argument weaker.
You have also never actually refuted any of the criticisms against your idea or given solutions to any of the issues other users have raised with the exception of things you think qualify as the user having “not read” your argument, which is not compelling evidence to support your argument.

Agreed.
The section where the OP says people aren't reading is a section that isn't very well presented either, with the unnecessary fonts and colours, plus, the incorrect usage of brackets (no closing brackets), as well as the large amount of text in brackets, which is also repeated/copied and pasted in another section in brackets, it overall makes that section hard to read.

sti_scratch wrote:

furrypig wrote:

sti_scratch wrote:

It should be optional to Scratchers to show their location or not. We should give them freedom.

Woo hoo! You're officially the 5th not to read the giant, red, bold text that says:

You're allowed to keep your location private (for some reason people still aren't reading this! Currently, the count is 4 out of 7 people)

That makes the count now 5 out of 8 (that's 62.5% of all people)! As I said in the original post,

…if you are replying, make sure you have actually read through this topic. Most replies I've received are people claiming I said something when I said the opposite or repeating points already mentioned with no farther elaboration. This is just useless, and extremely annoying. I'd like to hear opinions, but sometimes it gets really annoying when most people are so careless. I'm glad people still did bring up a lot of new points, though (it's what changed my mind in the first place).

Anyways, please read the original post. This is getting to be extremely annoying! I may shut this topic down entirely!

You said “you're allowed to keep your location private.” You didn't say whether you're allowed to keep your location public or not.

So your question is whether you're allowed to have your location public in the first place? Yes! You have a location on your profile (Antarctica), so you are definitely allowed to have your location public, But that has nothing to do with this topic, or even the post you quoted! You said that it should be optional for scratchers to show their location or not. I said you didn't read the giant red text that said that the feature already exists. And now for some reason you're asking about whether scratchers are even able to give out their location in the first place? It's like:
Person A: “Maybe profile pictures should be removed, because people might not want to have one. But then again, it is optional to have a profile picture, anyway, and just have a default scratch cat picture…”
Person B: “I think it should be optional to have a profile picture.”
Person A: “Uh, it already is. I just said that.”
Person B: “You said profile pictures are already optional, but you never said whether we're allowed to have profile pictures in the first place, though”
Person A: “Yes, you can have profile pictures; you have one, I have one, a lot of people do. But that has nothing to do with this conversation!”

Edit: Sorry for being so annoyed in this post, I just was… annoyed. :(

TheRealNetherBefore wrote:

I think that if that many users are “misreading” your post, the problem likely isn't on them, it's on you. I have carefully re-read the whole massive paragraph you keep continuously editing and I have yet to see anything that contradicts the point I have made. You've mentioned in massive bold letters that you already know there's a feature to turn location off yet you have provided no compelling argument for why this isn't satisfactory other than “some users might want more” with no evidence of users who feel that way or reasons why users would find that unsatisfactory. You've also mentioned that you have also never seen anyone be bullied for this however then proceed to talk about how people could be bullied for this as though it is a good reason to remove the feature- people being mocked for their location is literally a part of your argument as to thy the feature should be removed, just because you've mentioned that you also have literally never seen anyone be mocked for this doesn't make you exempt from that criticism, it just makes your argument weaker.
You have also never actually refuted any of the criticisms against your idea or given solutions to any of the issues other users have raised with the exception of things you think qualify as the user having “not read” your argument, which is not compelling evidence to support your argument.

I don't think anything contradicts the points you've made, and never has. The problem you've had is that you didn't read things and instead just repeated things I said (or things like the time you said I was saying that I did see bullying when I clearly said I didn't ever). But your points themselves still made sense.

In the part about users wanting more privacy, I mentioned that some users might want more privacy. Of course, as I don't agree with that section (or any pro arguments), I'm not one of the people who think so, but it is left there in case there is anybody who has an opposite view point to mine (which I have yet to see, though I'm not sure that even will happen. Still, why not try?) So yes, that part does not have evidence, but it is designed for a point of discussion for anybody with different views, if they come (as explained in the first paragraph of the original post). I'm completely fine that nobody sees any evidence in there, because it's pretty clear that there is none (that paragraph is extremely week). The part I was annoyed about was that users were constantly suggesting to add a feature that allows location to be optional when it already is. That's why I put it in bold, red, italics, underline, big, etc, not because people weren't understanding an argument behind it (which, as I explained, is non-existent).

In the part about bullying, I explained that even though it doesn't happen, it could, and might want to be taken off before that happens (though in my opinion, it really isn't going to happen and that extreme of precautions don't need to be taken, but again, for discussion and people that do have that view, like explained in the first paragraph of the original post). I also mentioned non-public bullying, which it looks like you missed.

In the places where I told people to re-read, it was because they were repeating something already mentioned or saying something or arguing against something already refuted. Please tell me of any arguments people made that were not repeats, already refuted, or agreed with that I didn't say anything about (perhaps I missed something?)

Anyways, I'll try to make the first paragraph of the original post more clear about why the arguments for the opposite side of ours is a bit weak in places. I can tell it may be unclear if you go back on the original post so many times and still don't understand.

Edit: Some stuff in the first paragraph has been moved, see original post updates post for more information

dude341 wrote:

furrypig wrote:

Also, please elaborate on “there is no reason for it to be removed.” Half of the reasons I put in the original post are pro for removing the location feature, so there are certainly reasons. Do you mean you think these reasons aren't good enough?

1. “Pro: What is it used for?” I don't really think this is a reason for it to be removed.
2. “Pro: It's used in statistics, but doesn't need to be on profiles”: It's useful on profiles. It lets people know that you're from that country, and, for example, it lets people know that they're probably not gonna understand what you're talking about if it's something that doesn't exist in their country.
3. “Pro: It has negative effects” I'm not sure many people consider what country they live in as personal information. As for the stereotypes, I've never seen anybody do this (at least in a way meant to offend someone) on Scratch because of this feature. If you see this happen, report it. You mention in big, red text “Also, though it doesn't seem to happen” (which I missed because that section was a bit hard to read, you might want to fix it a bit) but you haven't provided any proof of this - I know this can be hard on Scratch due to the naming and shaming rule but maybe add a quote from a Scratch Team member saying that this is something that happens frequently on Scratch.
4. “Pro: It seems more like a thing for about me” Takes up too much space, especially if your country name is long. This is one of the main reasons why I don't support this suggestion and why I think it is an inconvenience.

1. Ok, that makes sense, because it isn't unnecessary (as explained in the other con sections)
2. Yup, it is useful on profiles, as explained in one of the con sections.
3a. Yup, it isn't personal information, really, because it's so unexact and barely private (as explained as well).
3b. Well, I've never seen country-based bullying, and you said you haven't either. Everybody else says they also haven't. I've never heard of it happening, either. That's why I put that it doesn't seem to happen. However, I put “seem” because it might happen and I've never seen it, and if somebody has, they can tell me. So I don't think it's the kind of thing that needs evidence. Also, why should I add a quote saying that it does happen on scratch when I'm saying that it “doesn't seem to happen”? That makes no sense…
4. I'll add that space idea in. Yup, I definitely agree, it is an inconvenience.
Alright, thanks for being constructive and explaining why you think what you think—it's very helpful to know :)

dude341 wrote:

TheRealNetherBefore wrote:

I think that if that many users are “misreading” your post, the problem likely isn't on them, it's on you. I have carefully re-read the whole massive paragraph you keep continuously editing and I have yet to see anything that contradicts the point I have made. You've mentioned in massive bold letters that you already know there's a feature to turn location off yet you have provided no compelling argument for why this isn't satisfactory other than “some users might want more” with no evidence of users who feel that way or reasons why users would find that unsatisfactory. You've also mentioned that you have also never seen anyone be bullied for this however then proceed to talk about how people could be bullied for this as though it is a good reason to remove the feature- people being mocked for their location is literally a part of your argument as to thy the feature should be removed, just because you've mentioned that you also have literally never seen anyone be mocked for this doesn't make you exempt from that criticism, it just makes your argument weaker.
You have also never actually refuted any of the criticisms against your idea or given solutions to any of the issues other users have raised with the exception of things you think qualify as the user having “not read” your argument, which is not compelling evidence to support your argument.

Agreed.
The section where the OP says people aren't reading is a section that isn't very well presented either, with the unnecessary fonts and colours, plus, the incorrect usage of brackets (no closing brackets), as well as the large amount of text in brackets, which is also repeated/copied and pasted in another section in brackets, it overall makes that section hard to read.

First, you might want to read my reply to TheRealNetherBefore up above. There it explains what I meant by some of the stuff that TheRealNetherBefore was talking about that you agreed with. I put the fonts and colors in so more people would read those important ideas, because so many people didn't, I don't think it's too interuptive of the text. I'll change the parentheses, too, because they're way too long (I just got so annoyed that I added a ton of stuff XD) I'll also fix the error of no closing brackets, which I didn't notice, though it would have been nicer if you just told me instead of mentioning it here. But it's nice to hear about this somewhere. I don't think anything is repeated or copied over, though the section is hard to read, which I'll try to fix.

1. Points simplified to be more understandable
2. Points that refute other points now mentioned (to hopefully prevent people repeating already mentioned points)
3. Points now labeled to easily be identified
4. Sections organized into mega-sections
5. Negative effects and negative effects opposite separated into 5 sections
6. One new con section: About me space, mentioned by Dude341
7. Stuff from the original big first paragraph was moved into the new negative effects mega-section
8. Did anybody notice the completely unfinished section that was near the bottom of the original post? I'm surprised nobody said anything when they claimed to have read over the original post :/ (it's fixed now)
9. Sorry for recent toxic attitude, just extremely annoyed :(

I'm being real honest here , no support. Many people have said it can be useful in some cases, and is hardly an invasion of privacy. For example I live in the U.S., a country with 300 million people. In fact, I can say I live in New York, and it will still be hard to track me considering New York's population is 8.55 million. I could probably reveal my city which has 200,000 people, and you'd probably have a hard time tracking me. And as Za-Chary stated, its nice to see the diversity of Scratch. Racism is less of a problem on Scratch, there are bigger problems on the website containing diversity.

TheAdriCoolManDude wrote:

Racism is less of a problem on Scratch, there are bigger problems on the website containing diversity.

I agree with this. It's very hard to determine a person's skin color over the Internet. Even though you could just look at the country, it is not a prominent part of the profile page, and it still doesn't mean that you can be “racist”, as you still don't know the user's skin color.

Meanwhile, as I've said before, I see a lot of comments against gay people, people of a certain religion, and Fortnite lovers, rather than anything regarding race or country of origin.

furrypig wrote:

sti_scratch wrote:

furrypig wrote:

sti_scratch wrote:

It should be optional to Scratchers to show their location or not. We should give them freedom.

Woo hoo! You're officially the 5th not to read the giant, red, bold text that says:

You're allowed to keep your location private (for some reason people still aren't reading this! Currently, the count is 4 out of 7 people)

That makes the count now 5 out of 8 (that's 62.5% of all people)! As I said in the original post,

…if you are replying, make sure you have actually read through this topic. Most replies I've received are people claiming I said something when I said the opposite or repeating points already mentioned with no farther elaboration. This is just useless, and extremely annoying. I'd like to hear opinions, but sometimes it gets really annoying when most people are so careless. I'm glad people still did bring up a lot of new points, though (it's what changed my mind in the first place).

Anyways, please read the original post. This is getting to be extremely annoying! I may shut this topic down entirely!

You said “you're allowed to keep your location private.” You didn't say whether you're allowed to keep your location public or not.

So your question is whether you're allowed to have your location public in the first place? Yes! You have a location on your profile (Antarctica), so you are definitely allowed to have your location public, But that has nothing to do with this topic, or even the post you quoted! You said that it should be optional for scratchers to show their location or not. I said you didn't read the giant red text that said that the feature already exists. And now for some reason you're asking about whether scratchers are even able to give out their location in the first place? It's like:
Person A: “Maybe profile pictures should be removed, because people might not want to have one. But then again, it is optional to have a profile picture, anyway, and just have a default scratch cat picture…”
Person B: “I think it should be optional to have a profile picture.”
Person A: “Uh, it already is. I just said that.”
Person B: “You said profile pictures are already optional, but you never said whether we're allowed to have profile pictures in the first place, though”
Person A: “Yes, you can have profile pictures; you have one, I have one, a lot of people do. But that has nothing to do with this conversation!”

Edit: Sorry for being so annoyed in this post, I just was… annoyed. :(

I was asking if you would still be able to keep your location public after this suggestion gets implemented. If you are annoyed at me for not reading your post properly, then keep in mind that you do the same.

I think it should

hellocoders wrote:

I think it should

Why do you think it should be removed? Please be constructive.

KJRYoshi07 wrote:

hellocoders wrote:

I think it should

Why do you think it should be removed? Please be constructive.

Because they think removing it is a good idea. :P

TheAdriCoolManDude wrote:

I'm being real honest here , no support. Many people have said it can be useful in some cases, and is hardly an invasion of privacy. For example I live in the U.S., a country with 300 million people. In fact, I can say I live in New York, and it will still be hard to track me considering New York's population is 8.55 million. I could probably reveal my city which has 200,000 people, and you'd probably have a hard time tracking me. And as Za-Chary stated, its nice to see the diversity of Scratch. Racism is less of a problem on Scratch, there are bigger problems on the website containing diversity.

Yup, I agree with this for sure. However, I already acknowledged all of these points in the original post, so I won't be able to add them. But yes, they make sense.
Also, racism is different from being mean because of country—remember this! People can live anywhere, regardless of race, so you can't assume their race from just where they live.
Anyways, it's nice to see a post where the reader definitely understood everything, I've had problems before with other people not. Thanks for sharing! :)
Edit: If you don't see it as an invasion of privacy, why does your profile not say “U.S.” as you say you live in?

Za-Chary wrote:

TheAdriCoolManDude wrote:

Racism is less of a problem on Scratch, there are bigger problems on the website containing diversity.

I agree with this. It's very hard to determine a person's skin color over the Internet. Even though you could just look at the country, it is not a prominent part of the profile page, and it still doesn't mean that you can be “racist”, as you still don't know the user's skin color.

Meanwhile, as I've said before, I see a lot of comments against gay people, people of a certain religion, and Fortnite lovers, rather than anything regarding race or country of origin.

Well, race-based hate really wouldn't be a problem unless people assumed race from country. However, country-based hate could be a problem, though I haven't seen it before.

sti_scratch wrote:

furrypig wrote:

sti_scratch wrote:

furrypig wrote:

sti_scratch wrote:

It should be optional to Scratchers to show their location or not. We should give them freedom.

Woo hoo! You're officially the 5th not to read the giant, red, bold text that says:

You're allowed to keep your location private (for some reason people still aren't reading this! Currently, the count is 4 out of 7 people)

That makes the count now 5 out of 8 (that's 62.5% of all people)! As I said in the original post,

…if you are replying, make sure you have actually read through this topic. Most replies I've received are people claiming I said something when I said the opposite or repeating points already mentioned with no farther elaboration. This is just useless, and extremely annoying. I'd like to hear opinions, but sometimes it gets really annoying when most people are so careless. I'm glad people still did bring up a lot of new points, though (it's what changed my mind in the first place).

Anyways, please read the original post. This is getting to be extremely annoying! I may shut this topic down entirely!

You said “you're allowed to keep your location private.” You didn't say whether you're allowed to keep your location public or not.

So your question is whether you're allowed to have your location public in the first place? Yes! You have a location on your profile (Antarctica), so you are definitely allowed to have your location public, But that has nothing to do with this topic, or even the post you quoted! You said that it should be optional for scratchers to show their location or not. I said you didn't read the giant red text that said that the feature already exists. And now for some reason you're asking about whether scratchers are even able to give out their location in the first place? It's like:
Person A: “Maybe profile pictures should be removed, because people might not want to have one. But then again, it is optional to have a profile picture, anyway, and just have a default scratch cat picture…”
Person B: “I think it should be optional to have a profile picture.”
Person A: “Uh, it already is. I just said that.”
Person B: “You said profile pictures are already optional, but you never said whether we're allowed to have profile pictures in the first place, though”
Person A: “Yes, you can have profile pictures; you have one, I have one, a lot of people do. But that has nothing to do with this conversation!”

Edit: Sorry for being so annoyed in this post, I just was… annoyed. :(

I was asking if you would still be able to keep your location public after this suggestion gets implemented. If you are annoyed at me for not reading your post properly, then keep in mind that you do the same.

Oops, sorry for not understanding. I thought you were talking about keeping the location optional in general like everyone else. I'll add a section on this to the main post. So what do you think about that, if this suggestion were to get implemented?
Again, so sorry for going so crazy. I've apologized many times now, but as I said, I shouldn't have gotten so overly annoyed. I'm not annoyed anymore, though, and trying to be excepting of everybody's actions. I don't think you misunderstood anything, also: You just said something that I thought was completely unrelated because your post was unclear, but you didn't misunderstand anything.

hellocoders wrote:

I think it should

You think it should be kept, or should be removed? And, as I said in the original post, explain your reasoning. It adds nothing to the discussion to just say your opinion, if you don't explain anything.

sti_scratch wrote:

KJRYoshi07 wrote:

hellocoders wrote:

I think it should

Why do you think it should be removed? Please be constructive.

Because they think removing it is a good idea. :P

But the question is why they think that, not just what they think…

furrypig wrote:

sti_scratch wrote:

KJRYoshi07 wrote:

hellocoders wrote:

I think it should

Why do you think it should be removed? Please be constructive.

Because they think removing it is a good idea. :P

But the question is why they think that, not just what they think…

It was meant to be a reference to this…

sti_scratch wrote:

furrypig wrote:

sti_scratch wrote:

KJRYoshi07 wrote:

hellocoders wrote:

I think it should

Why do you think it should be removed? Please be constructive.

Because they think removing it is a good idea. :P

But the question is why they think that, not just what they think…

It was meant to be a reference to this…

grrrrrrrrrrr don't bring me back to that

By the way, for 2A, I do think sharing the country I live in can be an invasion of privacy. But I'll share it anyways; I live in Antarctica.

sti_scratch wrote:

By the way, for 2A, I do think sharing the country I live in can be an invasion of privacy. But I'll share it anyways; I live in Antarctica.

Antarctica isn't a country, it's a continent, and I really doubt you actually live in Antarctica either, no offence. Could you also explain how sharing the country you live in is an invasion of privacy?

Please correct the original post, it's dude341 not Dude341.