Extreme no support. Scratch is about community, having and creating friends, and this would get rid of that. If a child does something wrong, report it, and the Scratch Team will kindly let them know what they did was wrong and if they're a good child who listens to instructions, they won't do it again. If they don't listen to instructions, they deserve to get blocked.

Why is it worth taking away a key feature of Scratch for underage people? How is Scratch supposed to determine who is underage? What's stopping underage children from faking their age and >13 year olds getting falsely accused of being underage? What would make the site much different from other block based programming websites?

i_eat_coffee wrote:

Scratch--TheCat wrote:

No support. Scratch is supposed to be for everyone regardless of age, and removing social features for Scratchers under 13 means underaged Scratchers will leave Scratch (which is a lot of Scratchers).
Also:

Aidanthedumm wrote:

Also, how is Scratch supposed to detect if a user grows up?

I’d also like to add that the main reason of this suggestion is to protect children. I keep saying this, but no one really understands.
If many kids leave Scratch, that would be a good thing, since there would be less occurences of the issues I have mentioned in my original post.

"Ah yes, lets make most of the MAIN audience of this website leave! That would definitely make the website better and doesn't cause any negative effects!"/sarcasm.

Again, no support.

i_eat_coffee wrote:

eikh2 wrote:

No support, this would've stopped me from doing lots of things when I was 11-12 here.

And that’s great!

Not when it comes to recruiting voice actors or sharing games in general.

eikh2 wrote:

i_eat_coffee wrote:

eikh2 wrote:

No support, this would've stopped me from doing lots of things when I was 11-12 here.

And that’s great!

Not when it comes to recruiting voice actors or sharing games in general.

That’s the issue.

i_eat_coffee wrote:

GIitchInTheMatrix wrote:

The other main issue, under 13 is when you should be making these mistakes, this age is when you can go back on them later on, when it's easiest to learn to change these behaviors.
Scratch already does a lot to block social medias and inappropriate comments, in real time, the filter.

But you didn’t read my post.

Yes, I did.
You don't alienate the specific group it's aimed at, and expect for it to work.
You didn't seem to read my post.

i_eat_coffee wrote:

eikh2 wrote:

i_eat_coffee wrote:

eikh2 wrote:

No support, this would've stopped me from doing lots of things when I was 11-12 here.

And that’s great!

Not when it comes to recruiting voice actors or sharing games in general.

That’s the issue.

How can it be an issue?

i_eat_coffee wrote:

eikh2 wrote:

i_eat_coffee wrote:

eikh2 wrote:

No support, this would've stopped me from doing lots of things when I was 11-12 here.

And that’s great!

Not when it comes to recruiting voice actors or sharing games in general.

That’s the issue.

How is that an issue?

Also another issue with doing this: This would stop students on Scratch from peer reviewing other projects with comments. Peer reviewing is a pretty important part of software development when working in a group/team.

GIitchInTheMatrix wrote:

i_eat_coffee wrote:

GIitchInTheMatrix wrote:

The other main issue, under 13 is when you should be making these mistakes, this age is when you can go back on them later on, when it's easiest to learn to change these behaviors.
Scratch already does a lot to block social medias and inappropriate comments, in real time, the filter.

But you didn’t read my post.

Yes, I did.
You don't alienate the specific group it's aimed at, and expect for it to work.
You didn't seem to read my post.

No. Children don’t understand how to act online, so they will get banned.
And later in life, they will realise all personal info and other cringe things they have shared, and they will be unable to remove them.

ajskateboarder wrote:

Also another issue with doing this: This would stop students on Scratch from peer reviewing other projects with comments. Peer reviewing is a pretty important part of software development when working in a group/team.

see, now that’s a good argument

i_eat_coffee wrote:

GIitchInTheMatrix wrote:

i_eat_coffee wrote:

GIitchInTheMatrix wrote:

The other main issue, under 13 is when you should be making these mistakes, this age is when you can go back on them later on, when it's easiest to learn to change these behaviors.
Scratch already does a lot to block social medias and inappropriate comments, in real time, the filter.

But you didn’t read my post.

Yes, I did.
You don't alienate the specific group it's aimed at, and expect for it to work.
You didn't seem to read my post.

No. Children don’t understand how to act online, so they will get banned.
And later in life, they will realise all personal info and other cringe things they have shared, and they will be unable to remove them.

1. Some children do know how to act online so your suggestion is to banall under 13s from using social actions even the ones that can act good on the internet so they can not use social actions.
2. They may learn from these mistakes.
3. Just because of the risk of that happening does not mean you need ban all under 13s.

If you can't use scratch under 13 then why even use scratch at all? Over 13 you can easily use other social media platforms. Scratch is designed for children, and thus will be used as such.

-Valtren- wrote:

If you can't use scratch under 13 then why even use scratch at all? Over 13 you can easily use other social media platforms. Scratch is designed for children, and thus will be used as such.

Completely ignoring my point.

i_eat_coffee wrote:

No. Children don’t understand how to act online, so they will get banned.
And later in life, they will realise all personal info and other cringe things they have shared, and they will be unable to remove them.

Some children do know how to act online (when I was 9, I knew how to act online).
If they get banned, they will learn their actions have consequences and they will know what they did wrong and not to do it again.
For the personal info, Scratch literally says to not share personal information and if you do it, you will get an alert.
For the “cringe things”, I'm sure we can all agree we've done cringe things as children and we will just ignore it.

This post looks very alarmist to me.

i_eat_coffee wrote:

I believe this is a very important suggestion, because Scratch could, very well, be
at risk of a lawsuit

What are you talking about? Scratch can't be sued for people being mean on the internet. And there is little to no chance of somebody sharing their face online resulting in a lawsuit either, and especially not against a non-profit educational website.
This is only going to result in more people lying about their age to get around restrictions.

I’m going to break this down piece by piece and explain this more.

i_eat_coffee wrote:

That’s not true, please read the original post.

Not true? Excuse me? Then why does it restrict the high amount of children who are 10-13 years old to use a kids coding website made for kids? What you’re suggesting is to restrict social actions for underage and even younger scratcher(s), which in my opinion is very disappointing and also very wrong.

i_eat_coffee wrote:

Eh, no big deal, the Moderation team will take care of it, right?
Wrong. Let me explain the two main reasons as to why this is not such a good idea:
Moderators are overworked, as stated by a Scratch Team member before, and sometimes, the filterbot may be broken or may let users post some phrases that shouldn’t be allowed.

The Moderation team was cut down due to people losing their jobs and also not doing them right, and it definitely is a big deal because there are thousands of users here registered, also including me and everyone else here. Yes, they are overworked, but the Scratch Team are diligent and intelligent people working as a team to improve that moderation with the right resources and software, and not relying on using very many third party software.

i_eat_coffee wrote:

Projects can contain any text, freely, even curse words and hate speech, such as A LOT of naming & shaming and, well, mostly underage children encouraging other underage children to harm themselves.
Especially on the forums, there’s a lot of drama and trolls, mainly 11-13 year olds spamming gossip about other Scratchers, and over 5+ hours before finally getting their post removed by a moderator. Projects may take even longer, due to their complexity.

I’m starting to see a red flag here and also a gap where trolls can do whatever they want with nothing stopping them, which is not okay for a website like this. Allowing this kind of stuff to a user causes more issues and doesn’t solve any of them, and it creates more issues than solutions to any problem, so I disagree on any of this.

No support. I see no point in overriding moderation for a program like Scratch, and the things I stated above will force children that are under 13 to leave, which the Scratch Team doesn’t allow according to the guidelines.

There’s also this article here about moderation and how it works. Not every member or the whole Scratch Team can ensure the safety of everyone: https://en.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/Scratch_Safety

No support, scratch is made for kids, removing a huge part of scratch from its target demographic would be like a sports shop only selling stuff to people who don't play sports.

i_eat_coffee wrote:

ajskateboarder wrote:

Also another issue with doing this: This would stop students on Scratch from peer reviewing other projects with comments. Peer reviewing is a pretty important part of software development when working in a group/team.

see, now that’s a good argument

If it's such a good argument, why don't you create a counterargument?

i_eat_coffee wrote:

eikh2 wrote:

i_eat_coffee wrote:

eikh2 wrote:

No support, this would've stopped me from doing lots of things when I was 11-12 here.

And that’s great!

Not when it comes to recruiting voice actors or sharing games in general.

That’s the issue.

How is that an issue?

i_eat_coffee wrote:

You could still love & fav & remix, but you wouldn’t be able to share

That would break the motto imagine, program, share