SuperMarioHome wrote:

No support. Users new to the forums may not understand why the post would be rejected if they just put ‘Support’ or ‘No support’.

They might do that at first!

The mockup in the above post.literally has a reason with it.

ScolderCreations wrote:

Reading the replies… …bad idea.

You have a good point, not to mention this would be simply discouraged by adding this feature.

Codingfairy07 wrote:

ScolderCreations wrote:

Reading the replies to this topic made me very mad. Just because this can be worked around, doesn't mean it shouldn't be implemented. People can work around swearwords, but we shouldn't allow people to say them anyway, right? People could post links to inappropriate websites if they found some work around, but we still try to stop them, don't we? So saying you don't support just because people could find a way around it, is absolutely invalid, and I support the suggestion because it would cut down on spam, just because it doesn't 100% ensure that it doesn't happen doesn't mean it's a bad idea.

Well, this is impossible. The filter can’t detect context.

It can detect a post that is just “no support”
Cruncherbones

Support.

Enough said. Ain’t constructive in the slightest.
Also, bump.

S[b][/b]upport
Support!
Support.
+1
+98765434567654345678765 (or any number)
I support this!
Support!
1000000000000e+Infinity% Support!

Ignore this

No Support

doggy_boi1 wrote:

No Support

Please be constructive and say why you don't support. (Or is that a test?)

k7e wrote:

doggy_boi1 wrote:

No Support

Please be constructive and say why you don't support. (Or is that a test?)

I don't support it because scratches filter bot cant detect context, there are too many bypasses, and it would just be annoying (it also doesn't go against tas)

doggy_boi1 wrote:

(#48)

k7e wrote:

doggy_boi1 wrote:

No Support

Please be constructive and say why you don't support. (Or is that a test?)

I don't support it because scratches filter bot cant detect context, there are too many bypasses, and it would just be annoying (it also doesn't go against tas)

actually it's against the rules to make unconstructive posts like that

lapisi wrote:

doggy_boi1 wrote:

(#48)

k7e wrote:

doggy_boi1 wrote:

No Support

Please be constructive and say why you don't support. (Or is that a test?)

I don't support it because scratches filter bot cant detect context, there are too many bypasses, and it would just be annoying (it also doesn't go against tas)

actually it's against the rules to make unconstructive posts like that

fr? where?

doggy_boi1 wrote:

lapisi wrote:

doggy_boi1 wrote:

(#48)

k7e wrote:

doggy_boi1 wrote:

No Support

Please be constructive and say why you don't support. (Or is that a test?)

I don't support it because scratches filter bot cant detect context, there are too many bypasses, and it would just be annoying (it also doesn't go against tas)

actually it's against the rules to make unconstructive posts like that

fr? where?

oh, I found it, and I'm pretty sure it's just for projects. How would they implement the op's idea anyways?

k7e wrote:

S[b][/b]upport
Support!
Support.
+1
+98765434567654345678765 (or any number)
I support this!
Support!
1000000000000e+Infinity% Support!

Also, someone could just say this:
[OP quote] Support!

I don’t like this idea.
You probably get the point by now

k7e wrote:

S[b][/b]upport
Support!
Support.
+1
+98765434567654345678765 (or any number)
I support this!
Support!
1000000000000e+Infinity% Support!

please be constructive so wh y you suppert

capybara256 wrote:

k7e wrote:

S[b][/b]upport
Support!
Support.
+1
+98765434567654345678765 (or any number)
I support this!
Support!
1000000000000e+Infinity% Support!

please be constructive so wh y you suppert

Those are other things that people could say instead of “support” to get around the censor.

capybara256 wrote:

k7e wrote:

S[b][/b]upport
Support!
Support.
+1
+98765434567654345678765 (or any number)
I support this!
Support!
1000000000000e+Infinity% Support!

please be constructive so wh y you suppert

It’s an example of workarounds for this filter. It’s constructive.

why does the human will have to go so far to say such a simple thing so complicated when they could just e constructive. Just because there is a workaround doesn't mean that it will often be used. This system will help teacher new scratchers things. Its not like they are not going to read it.

i think it should work like this: if the post have support or no support it should atleast have another 10 or maybe 20 letters

capybara256 wrote:

i think it should work like this: if the post have support or no support it should atleast have another 10 or maybe 20 letters

[OP Quote]
I support this!