joshuaho wrote:

jvvg wrote:

As I have done on so many suggestions, I am going to express my opinion on this idea.

This website prides itself on having short terms of use, so that people will actually read them (in fact, they're called “Community guidelines” for that reason!). However, some users in the past have explained that the CG are very vague and they would like a list of rules, so one user suggested making an extended version containing the specific rules (check out what's on Mod Share for an example of what I think that would be like).

A bunch of posters on this topic also appear to share that opinion, and I also feel that would be a good idea. It helps to know exactly what the rules are. While I've been here for quite a while and have figured them out, new users are not in the same situation.

Yes, you are right! +1000000000

You are both right! +1000000001!

mathfreak231 wrote:

joshuaho wrote:

That added stuff in italics can well, bring some negative attention. It all starts with a scratcher not knowing the rules.

that's the point of having them read the guidelines first

How's the guidelines going to help? It does not say to not mention the names.

Definitely support. There are probably some rules that I don't even know about.

Du-bump

han614698 wrote:

Du-bump

Did you really just necropost an 8 year old topic?

The Community Guidelines are supposed to be short and concise, so no support.
How about creating a new list called “Rules and Policies” which states all the rules and policies in detail?

9cjames1 wrote:

han614698 wrote:

Du-bump

Did you really just necropost an 8 year old topic?

It’s not necroposting in suggestions, as long as the topic is still relevant.

Reev0102 wrote:

The Community Guidelines are supposed to be short and concise, so no support.
How about creating a new list called “Rules and Policies” which states all the rules and policies in detail?

You are right that they should be concise, but the problems with a “Rules and Policies” list is that, inherently, it's impossible for us to do so.

To illustrate this, let us suppose that “sneeze” was a bad word. We can't actually put “sneeze” anywhere in the “Rules and Policies” list because that's a bad word and therefore breaks our own Community Guidelines — people would see a bad word there. In particular, we cannot put “Don't comment ‘sneeze’ anywhere” on that list.

Of course, this would be rectified by putting an entry “Don't comment bad words” in the list. However, this is ambiguous. What is a “bad word”? Some Scratchers consider “frick” to be a bad word. Others think that really-bad words aren't that bad. In particular, someone could get alerted for saying “sneeze” (the hypothetical bad word) and then argue against it, saying “The word ‘sneeze’ isn't bad, and the list of rules doesn't explicitly say ‘Don’t comment sneeze anywhere,' yet I still got alerted for it!”

I think there could be a link to another page on the CG with a list of policies like the extensions one, for example. That way the CG wouldn’t be too cluttered, but a noticeable link on the page would help people see policies that some users don’t know exist.

Support.
Most people say extensions and they accidentally get an alert for it because nobody told them about BESuP.

I think maybe a rule page with other rules would be nice but that will still not have every single situation. It would just be stuff like “don’t name browser extensions”, and other polices that are too specific in the main guidelines.

No Support
The community guidelines are supposed to be simple and contain only the most important rules that apply to everybody. Adding more to it will counter-intuitively make the situation worse because most people don't bother with reading long “terms of use” (only 7-9% read it word-by-word according to various websites).

(Hypothetical scenario)
You will get x & y doing things that they are not supposed to do under the excuse “that they didn't read the guidelines”. y might complain that they didn't know that they were not allowed to do the, again because “the guidelines were too long to read”. Then z complains from that x & y were being disrespectful.

At the end, you will get more people breaking the rules, more people complaining about how they didn't read the rules and more people complaining about how another person treated them badly and broke the rules.

It is simply too much of a hassle to deal with
…………………………………………………………………………

My opinion would have been a support if the suggestion was about adding the extension policy to the community guidelines - like this:

Community Guidelines wrote:

Be safe :keep personal and contact information private online.
For safety reasons, don't give out any information that could be used for private communication, in person or online. This includes sharing real last names, phone numbers, addresses, hometowns, school names, email addresses, browser extensions, usernames or links to social media sites, video chatting applications or websites with private chat functionality.

Za-Chary wrote:

Reev0102 wrote:

-snip-

You are right that they should be concise, but the problems with a “Rules and Policies” list is that, inherently, it's impossible for us to do so.

To illustrate this, let us suppose that “sneeze” was a bad word. We can't actually put “sneeze” anywhere in the “Rules and Policies” list because that's a bad word and therefore breaks our own Community Guidelines — people would see a bad word there. In particular, we cannot put “Don't comment ‘sneeze’ anywhere” on that list.

Of course, this would be rectified by putting an entry “Don't comment bad words” in the list. However, this is ambiguous. What is a “bad word”? Some Scratchers consider “frick” to be a bad word. Others think that really-bad words aren't that bad. In particular, someone could get alerted for saying “sneeze” (the hypothetical bad word) and then argue against it, saying “The word ‘sneeze’ isn't bad, and the list of rules doesn't explicitly say ‘Don’t comment sneeze anywhere,' yet I still got alerted for it!”

For the bad words thing, something like “Don't comment anything that you feel users may find offensive” could be put on the list.

I think tonnes of rules may stop people reading the most important thing on scratch

H_Dur wrote:

I think tonnes of rules may stop people reading the most important thing on scratch

We already have tons of rules.

No support, this would make the guidelines too long

bump becuz dupe.
Anyway, this should be on a separate page, to keep the CGs (relatively) short.