welp, the countdown is over https://considercollabs.wordpress.com/

JohannGomez2021 wrote:

welp, the countdown is over https://considercollabs.wordpress.com/

that is not accurate, the creator himself said it, and thats not the topic of the forum

Bump

musicROCKS013, you're idea is great.

FF5Bartz wrote:

musicROCKS013, you're idea is great.

Thanks. I made mock-ups (there’re on page 2 I think). What do you think of them?

Edit: Is cubeupload blocked for you? If so, you won’t be able to see the mock-ups.

And here it is, the Ongoing Collaborations forum. Feel free to use!

How about this? Invites could work like a studio, where you invite people to the project, not vice versa. How else would users like griffpatch see the message when it is drowned out by spam?

musicROCKS013 wrote:

How about this? Invites could work like a studio, where you invite people to the project, not vice versa. How else would users like griffpatch see the message when it is drowned out by spam?

there should be a sort by urgency or something else, mabye it would be like (in reverse order, least urgent to most)
studio activity
comment activity
collab requests
forum activity
collab invitations
collab activity

but probably not exactly like that

saverofthewo wrote:

musicROCKS013 wrote:

How about this? Invites could work like a studio, where you invite people to the project, not vice versa. How else would users like griffpatch see the message when it is drowned out by spam?

there should be a sort by urgency or something else, mabye it would be like (in reverse order, least urgent to most)
studio activity
comment activity
collab requests
forum activity
collab invitations
collab activity

but probably not exactly like that

This seems like an entirely different suggestion…

I was suggesting that users invite other users to join, not vice versa where they send a request to join. Requesting to join can be down via comments anyways.

Micorntervals wrote:

Tunde123 wrote:

Some of the ST on that list retired. That list is outdated.

thats even less people

A few members like carpeediem are missing as well.

CallMeCoffee wrote:

op456 wrote:

This sounds like limiting who can edit and remix projects

But it wasn't about remixing? It was about the items in the Share Space, which only collaborators would be able to edit the items inside? Which there wouldn't be a shared project in this case, the Share Space would be like a public backpack for the collaborators. But the public can still view the items inside so reporting can be done when necessary

No, I think that it is that everyone can veiw and play the project but just not edit it. As it can be only edited by share space collaborators and I think may be a person can remix it but it will be considered a different project which is a remix of a collaboration shared space project and also people will be directed to the collaboration page instead of the project incase of a remix.

warriorcats2155 wrote:

op456 wrote:

I've to say, as someone who has participated time and time over in public collabs, generally, they work.

Yes, but do you know about the fact that SHARED PROJECTS CAN LEAK AND SPOIL EARLY GAME DEVELOPMENT?

I'm aware of this; but I don't see it as a problem. People don't generally want to use unfinished projects (and, if they do, are unlikely to replicate the final project made by multiple people before their collab is finished). Considering this, it's not actually much of an impairment to have to share such stuff publicly - and I think it just encourages development further; especially with open collabs (people can see work that's already done and add ideas).

Purvitekriwal wrote:

CallMeCoffee wrote:

op456 wrote:

This sounds like limiting who can edit and remix projects

But it wasn't about remixing? It was about the items in the Share Space, which only collaborators would be able to edit the items inside? Which there wouldn't be a shared project in this case, the Share Space would be like a public backpack for the collaborators. But the public can still view the items inside so reporting can be done when necessary

No, I think that it is that everyone can veiw and play the project but just not edit it. As it can be only edited by share space collaborators and I think may be a person can remix it but it will be considered a different project which is a remix of a collaboration shared space project and also people will be directed to the collaboration page instead of the project incase of a remix.

I'm not entirely sure I understand the phrasing of this entirely, if you could clarify that might be helpful.

musicROCKS013 wrote:

saverofthewo wrote:

musicROCKS013 wrote:

How about this? Invites could work like a studio, where you invite people to the project, not vice versa. How else would users like griffpatch see the message when it is drowned out by spam?

there should be a sort by urgency or something else, mabye it would be like (in reverse order, least urgent to most)
studio activity
comment activity
collab requests
forum activity
collab invitations
collab activity

but probably not exactly like that

This seems like an entirely different suggestion…

I was suggesting that users invite other users to join, not vice versa where they send a request to join. Requesting to join can be down via comments anyways.

i mean, like we can have both. also, everyone could just invite griffpatch to everything

saverofthewo wrote:

i mean, like we can have both. also, everyone could just invite griffpatch to everything

*Cough* Studios *Cough*

This isn’t really the place to discuss that, because we are discussing collabs right now. The less the ST has to do to implement this the better, imo.

musicROCKS013 wrote:

FF5Bartz wrote:

musicROCKS013, you're idea is great.

Thanks. I made mock-ups (there’re on page 2 I think). What do you think of them?

Edit: Is cubeupload blocked for you? If so, you won’t be able to see the mock-ups.

The mock-ups look great

[insert joke here]

Da-Bump-Shhhhhhh

What did the evil chicken lay?

Deviled eggs.
Da-Bump-Shhhhhhh

This is a duplicate
Original: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/322107/

Milk909 wrote:

This is a duplicate
Original: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/322107/

Did you read the whole OP?