1.I just want to say that there are many scratchers out there, and most scratchers now have to use long usernames because they are all taken. Lots of people want to call them a nickname, for example: Olivia, Eve, Jess, or any other name. But every single name as been taken, and nearly every one of those, probably 99% of those people, have not done a thing on scratch and joined, and basically have been name snipping, many people want those names, and it's kind of a waste for no one who does anything. I know why a username shouldn't be taken twice, that's obvious, but I think these accounts should be deleted and people have a chance to get the name they want, or like an object, or a pronoun, because on scratch there is a user, called you, with 1500 followers who has done nothing.

Edit: The ones that don't have any projects and are following no one and haven't done anything. The Scratch team should also email them and maybe delete it a few months after

2. Also moving onto a slightly different topic. Some scratchers are deleting their accounts but no one can get there username that they had. I'd like it, so we could get the username of a scratcher who deleted their account.

Say 1. Support or 1. No support for the first 1

or

Say 2. Support or 2. No support for the second 1

(((Finn the [Evil Kumquat Protector v]::#B22222)::#ffb6c1)::#9370DB)

I think this is rejected, isn't it?

7.5 Delete inactive accounts
The only potential benefit to this suggestion is that it would free up the servers; however, a Scratch Team member has indicated that there is not a desperate need for more server space. In addition, deleting inactive accounts might mean that the user's projects get deleted, which would be extremely unfortunate should they decide to return to Scratch.

This includes accounts that have no activity at all; that is, the account has no projects shared, favorited, or followers. The Scratch Team sees no need to take down any accounts at this time.

Za-Chary wrote:

I think this is rejected, isn't it?

7.5 Delete inactive accounts
The only potential benefit to this suggestion is that it would free up the servers; however, a Scratch Team member has indicated that there is not a desperate need for more server space. In addition, deleting inactive accounts might mean that the user's projects get deleted, which would be extremely unfortunate should they decide to return to Scratch.

This includes accounts that have no activity at all; that is, the account has no projects shared, favorited, or followers. The Scratch Team sees no need to take down any accounts at this time.

Most of them as far as I've seen don't have any projects. (Sorry I didn't realise there was another topic)

(((Finn the [Evil Kumquat Protector v]::#B22222)::#ffb6c1)::#9370DB)

I edited the description

(((Finn the [Evil Kumquat Protector v]::#B22222)::#ffb6c1)::#9370DB)

No support for either.

While I understand it can be frustrating with “name snipers”, they have that username and that ‘s that. There are some people who have left Scratch, or are simply taking a break, and I think it wouldn’t be nice to delete their account just for being “inactive”. Another reason I don't support is a bit of a sad one. Recently I was invited to a studio about a Scratcher who had died in a plane crash. Of course it wouldn't be fair to delete their account, since the user has passed.

For deleting accounts and freeing up usernames, that would cause A LOT of confusion. For example, if I deleted my account, someone could make an account with my name, which would confuse a lot of people.

LegoManiac04 wrote:

No support for either.

While I understand it can be frustrating with “name snipers”, they have that username and that ‘s that. There are some people who have left Scratch, or are simply taking a break, and I think it wouldn’t be nice to delete their account just for being “inactive”. Another reason I don't support is a bit of a sad one. Recently I was invited to a studio about a Scratcher who had died in a plane crash. Of course it wouldn't be fair to delete their account, since the user has passed.

For deleting accounts and freeing up usernames, that would cause A LOT of confusion. For example, if I deleted my account, someone could make an account with my name, which would confuse a lot of people.

I understand what your getting, and about the plane crash thing, that's so sad. But what if a user has been on scratch for 12 years, and had done and made nothing, and had the username Olivia, wouldn't someone else want that username?

(((Finn the [Evil Kumquat Protector v]::#B22222)::#ffb6c1)::#9370DB)

1. No support. I've made this argument before.

As far as completely inactive accounts that have done nothing other than join Scratch, I don't think we necessarily need to free up those account names. The following is a list of actual, active Scratchers on Scratch:

• @Za-Chary
  
• @Wahsp
  
• @BelieverGirlSun
  
• @ToadfanSchool
  

Now, the following is a list of similar usernames that are very inactive.

• @zachary
  
• @Wasp
  
• @believer
  
• @toadfan
  

Is it possible that some users may have chosen these account names because others were taken? Perhaps. But you'll notice that I joined before @zachary did. I put in the hyphen to make my username stand out, to make it more unique than a simple first name could be.

Usernames are all about you! And when you're on Scratch, one should be creative — and that does include the username. I would say that @Za-Chary, @Wahsp, @BelieverGirlSun, and @ToadfanSchool are much more creative, memorable usernames than @zachary, @Wasp, @believer, and @toadfan could ever be.

2. No support. There are users who were famous that have deleted their accounts. Perhaps they deleted their accounts for a reason. Users such as @Swifty2 and @Spidertest were very popular and well-known Scratchers.

To have someone else jump in and take their accounts would lead to a lot of problems since someone could easily impersonate the actual person behind the accounts, and the Scratch Team wouldn't necessarily be able to verify if the original owner is on the account, or if it's someone else.

In addition, certain data such as those accounts' followers are still stored in the servers; here you can see that in the case of @Swifty2: https://scratch.mit.edu/users/swifty2/followers/

I don't think this would really count as rejected. The OP is suggesting that only inactive, old namesniped accounts are deleted and for a reason not addressed in RS 7.5 - they are taking up a name and doing absolutely nothing for numerous years. I'm still on the fence about this for that reason.

Flipped_ wrote:

I don't think this would really count as rejected. The OP is suggesting that only inactive, old namesniped accounts are deleted and for a reason not addressed in RS 7.5 - they are taking up a name and doing absolutely nothing for numerous years. I'm still on the fence about this for that reason.

See this post: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/82236/?page=2#post-713516

Thanks to you, I will now be incorporating this into the rejected suggestion. Such a suggestion does still say,

Rejected Suggestions wrote:

This includes accounts that have no activity at all; that is, the account has no projects shared, favorited, or followers. The Scratch Team sees no need to take down any accounts at this time.

It would be really confusing if people chose an account of a popular scratcher who had left scratch. For example, if @griffpatch quit scratch (he didn't actually, this is just imagining) then people would quickly make a new account with his same username. It would be confusing and cause unneeded drama.

I would say support given the edit, but looks like this is rejected.

(My reason for support: I've wanted to make a test account called 92345, but someone took it, and hasn't done anything since.)