helloandgoodbye9 wrote:

ipushpeople wrote:

Abstract- wrote:

ipushpeople wrote:

i feel like that is just superfluous considering it says pretty much an equivalent right here.


also no one comes to scratch with the intent of being disrespectful to others based on those traits and the few who do obviously aren't going to have a swayed opinion if the text is added in the CGs (probably they wouldn't have read them in the first place which is a different issue).

and the very very few people who actually would be affected by the CG would have already seen the text i highlighted making this suggestion useless for any party.


so no support unless you honestly think there is a massive storm of little kids who don't know that harassing users based on those traits (that were already laid out in other areas) is okay then you go right on ahead and have it added. but i guarantee you there is not.

-D

Really, I have seen a project that basicly said that a certain religion (Not naming it for offencive purposes) was dumb.

so in other words, someone made a project that goes against the cg's and your answer is to beef up the cg's so they won't do it anymore?

i agree with what you want to do (make scratch more friendly), but that is not a solution.

-D

Please reread my post.

what do you mean? i didn't really say anything about your post

-D

ipushpeople wrote:

helloandgoodbye9 wrote:

ipushpeople wrote:

Abstract- wrote:

ipushpeople wrote:

i feel like that is just superfluous considering it says pretty much an equivalent right here.


also no one comes to scratch with the intent of being disrespectful to others based on those traits and the few who do obviously aren't going to have a swayed opinion if the text is added in the CGs (probably they wouldn't have read them in the first place which is a different issue).

and the very very few people who actually would be affected by the CG would have already seen the text i highlighted making this suggestion useless for any party.


so no support unless you honestly think there is a massive storm of little kids who don't know that harassing users based on those traits (that were already laid out in other areas) is okay then you go right on ahead and have it added. but i guarantee you there is not.

-D

Really, I have seen a project that basicly said that a certain religion (Not naming it for offencive purposes) was dumb.

so in other words, someone made a project that goes against the cg's and your answer is to beef up the cg's so they won't do it anymore?

i agree with what you want to do (make scratch more friendly), but that is not a solution.

-D

Please reread my post.

what do you mean? i didn't really say anything about your post

-D

My post explains that it needs to include not talking about that.

helloandgoodbye9 wrote:

ipushpeople wrote:

helloandgoodbye9 wrote:

ipushpeople wrote:

Abstract- wrote:

ipushpeople wrote:

i feel like that is just superfluous considering it says pretty much an equivalent right here.


also no one comes to scratch with the intent of being disrespectful to others based on those traits and the few who do obviously aren't going to have a swayed opinion if the text is added in the CGs (probably they wouldn't have read them in the first place which is a different issue).

and the very very few people who actually would be affected by the CG would have already seen the text i highlighted making this suggestion useless for any party.


so no support unless you honestly think there is a massive storm of little kids who don't know that harassing users based on those traits (that were already laid out in other areas) is okay then you go right on ahead and have it added. but i guarantee you there is not.

-D

Really, I have seen a project that basicly said that a certain religion (Not naming it for offencive purposes) was dumb.

so in other words, someone made a project that goes against the cg's and your answer is to beef up the cg's so they won't do it anymore?

i agree with what you want to do (make scratch more friendly), but that is not a solution.

-D

Please reread my post.

what do you mean? i didn't really say anything about your post

-D

My post explains that it needs to include not talking about that.

It only says it welcomes them…

helloandgoodbye9 wrote:

helloandgoodbye9 wrote:

ipushpeople wrote:

helloandgoodbye9 wrote:

ipushpeople wrote:

Abstract- wrote:

ipushpeople wrote:

i feel like that is just superfluous considering it says pretty much an equivalent right here.


also no one comes to scratch with the intent of being disrespectful to others based on those traits and the few who do obviously aren't going to have a swayed opinion if the text is added in the CGs (probably they wouldn't have read them in the first place which is a different issue).

and the very very few people who actually would be affected by the CG would have already seen the text i highlighted making this suggestion useless for any party.


so no support unless you honestly think there is a massive storm of little kids who don't know that harassing users based on those traits (that were already laid out in other areas) is okay then you go right on ahead and have it added. but i guarantee you there is not.

-D

Really, I have seen a project that basicly said that a certain religion (Not naming it for offencive purposes) was dumb.

so in other words, someone made a project that goes against the cg's and your answer is to beef up the cg's so they won't do it anymore?

i agree with what you want to do (make scratch more friendly), but that is not a solution.

-D

Please reread my post.

what do you mean? i didn't really say anything about your post

-D

My post explains that it needs to include not talking about that.

It only says it welcomes them…

alright well i still don't know why that is relevant to what i was talking about, but i think if you want to add something about banning religion that deserves a new topic beacuse that is not at all what was in the OP

-D

PrincessPanda_test_ wrote:

Whoa, religion is too strong to be discussed, okay?

Many do believe it that way; I'm not religious though, in here for religious correctness.

No?

lujo_2021 wrote:

No?

nothing is permanent.

I agree with ipushpeople. No one is going to go, “Oh, this one place in the Community Guidelines doesn't specifically say that you can't make fun of someone for their religion even though it says to ‘respect all backgrounds’ and ‘be respectful’ and later on it does specify that you can't make fun of someone for their religion, that must mean it's okay to mock a religion.”

ipushpeople wrote:

i feel like that is just superfluous considering it says pretty much an equivalent right here.
-img snip-

also no one comes to scratch with the intent of being disrespectful to others based on those traits and the few who do obviously aren't going to have a swayed opinion if the text is added in the CGs (probably they wouldn't have read them in the first place which is a different issue).

and the very very few people who actually would be affected by the CG would have already seen the text i highlighted making this suggestion useless for any party.


so no support unless you honestly think there is a massive storm of little kids who don't know that harassing users based on those traits (that were already laid out in other areas) is okay then you go right on ahead and have it added. but i guarantee you there is not.

-D

^^Agreed, no support.^^

The Community Guidelines now say “backgrounds and interests” which is a catch-all term for pretty much anything you can think of. This is not necessary anymore.

fdreerf wrote:

The Community Guidelines now say “backgrounds and interests” which is a catch-all term for pretty much anything you can think of. This is not necessary anymore.

That's only on the introduction sentence.

dhfbei8987 wrote:

fdreerf wrote:

The Community Guidelines now say “backgrounds and interests” which is a catch-all term for pretty much anything you can think of. This is not necessary anymore.

That's only on the introduction sentence.

Speaking of which, did you even read the introduction sentence of the original post?

liam48D wrote:

Support!

..without anything to add. Oops. I support this idea anyways.

Please be constructive and read the stickies before posting

Queer_Royalty wrote:

liam48D wrote:

Support!

..without anything to add. Oops. I support this idea anyways.

Please be constructive and read the stickies before posting

This was normal back then, it was only discouraged recently.