mentoskylerprime wrote:

I completely support this suggestion

Thank you.

Support!
I saw some talk here about Co-Owner limit. Based on the reasons given by the ST about the removal of those manager permissions, I think the limit should be somewhere between 2 and 5. Having only a small handful of people be able to edit a studio's description would not cause much risk of raiding, and the desc. shouldn't change so much that it would overload Scratch's servers.
(Sorry if this post doesn't make sense, I'm writing this at 10 PM.)

KitVMH wrote:

Support!
I saw some talk here about Co-Owner limit. Based on the reasons given by the ST about the removal of those manager permissions, I think the limit should be somewhere between 2 and 5. Having only a small handful of people be able to edit a studio's description would not cause much risk of raiding, and the desc. shouldn't change so much that it would overload Scratch's servers.
(Sorry if this post doesn't make sense, I'm writing this at 10 PM.)

2 is too low. I think it should be between 4 and 8.

Bump

Jackson49_test wrote:

Bump

Lol I forgot about this. Thank you

bump

I agree 100%

Also
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Ranboo

I think, in order for a co-owner to delete a studio, when they click delete, a message should be sent to the owner for them to accept it. But if the owner is inactive (no activities for a year) they can delete it themselves, but the owner will still be sent a message telling them that the studio has been deleted in case they come back and gets confused.

This would obviously solve the problem but I would like the name “Co-Studio Host” to fit in with the new studio update that let's people change Studio Hosts (or owners). Also, like the Studio Host is in the manager section, with this new rank, I believe it should be move to the “Co-Studio Host” section. Obviously, I would also like the limit to be moved upward to the Co-Studio Host rank, so you could have an infinite amount of managers now.

sure, i support. so it can be a bit easier to manage studios.

glosstea wrote:

I think, in order for a co-owner to delete a studio, when they click delete, a message should be sent to the owner for them to accept it. But if the owner is inactive (no activities for a year) they can delete it themselves, but the owner will still be sent a message telling them that the studio has been deleted in case they come back and gets confused.

I hope that's only to delete the studio. Otherwise, that defeats the purpose.

DinoMaster20 wrote:

glosstea wrote:

I think, in order for a co-owner to delete a studio, when they click delete, a message should be sent to the owner for them to accept it. But if the owner is inactive (no activities for a year) they can delete it themselves, but the owner will still be sent a message telling them that the studio has been deleted in case they come back and gets confused.

I hope that's only to delete the studio. Otherwise, that defeats the purpose.

yes, only to delete the studio completely,

glosstea wrote:

(#93)

DinoMaster20 wrote:

glosstea wrote:

I think, in order for a co-owner to delete a studio, when they click delete, a message should be sent to the owner for them to accept it. But if the owner is inactive (no activities for a year) they can delete it themselves, but the owner will still be sent a message telling them that the studio has been deleted in case they come back and gets confused.

I hope that's only to delete the studio. Otherwise, that defeats the purpose.

yes, only to delete the studio completely,

Ok, that makes since. As long as they don't need permission from manager for anything less important.

BRUH RICKROLL

Support

Support 100%.

big supportt

Unity_and_Cq wrote:

Support

warriorcatsfreakalt wrote:

Support 100%.

LAVEna_THe_NicE_Guy wrote:

big supportt

Please say why.

Lavender_lillypad wrote:

Unity_and_Cq wrote:

Support

warriorcatsfreakalt wrote:

Support 100%.

LAVEna_THe_NicE_Guy wrote:

big supportt

Please say why.

Forgot to say “for the reasons stated”