✏️ A new design for Scratch ✏️

sonic__fan

TheDumbRat wrote:
You can do that usinga -snip- in the setting “Scratch 2.0 to 3.0”!

Firstly, please don't mention browser extensions. It goes against this policy.
Secondly, what if I'm using a school or library computer and can't download browser extensions? What if I don't want to use an extension?

starlightsparker

Uh, the images are

[?]

I can’t see them

Last edited by starlightsparker (May 13, 2024 17:17:36)

Aaliyah_Newlands

+1

This would totally make Scratch more eyecatching!
Way more exciting colourful and organised!

mumu245

sonic__fan wrote:
(#622)
TheDumbRat wrote:
You can do that usinga -snip- in the setting “Scratch 2.0 to 3.0”!
Firstly, please don't mention browser extensions. It goes against this policy.
Secondly, what if I'm using a school or library computer and can't download browser extensions? What if I don't want to use an extension?

And it just makes the site look unpolished for those who don't use the extension.

MousePotato1234

In all honesty, the whole extension policy just seems overly strict. If you are overtly endorsing or advertising for an extension, though I personally wouldn't do it, I see why you'd censor the post or comment. But when somebody is just mentioning an extension or addon, that's when things go too far. It should be changed, but here comes the ST putting that on their very official list of rejected suggestions. One word for it all: censorship. $1,000,000 says the ST will censor me for daring to do so much as to *gasp* question them!

Dagriffpatchfan

Support, 2.0 pages look so outdated

ranwya24jac

Very cool

I wish that version of scratch was added

Bestdragon234

support
also it shouldnt be extension it should be for everyone

8to16

bump

jmb1293634

I found this mockup of the discuss pagehere

Last edited by jmb1293634 (Dec. 31, 2024 13:38:55)

iiucandyfloss

MousePotato1234 wrote:
In all honesty, the whole extension policy just seems overly strict. If you are overtly endorsing or advertising for an extension, though I personally wouldn't do it, I see why you'd censor the post or comment. But when somebody is just mentioning an extension or addon, that's when things go too far. It should be changed, but here comes the ST putting that on their very official list of rejected suggestions. One word for it all: censorship. $1,000,000 says the ST will censor me for daring to do so much as to *gasp* question them!

It's because some browser extensions might be dangerous, and the Scratch Team can't exactly check every browser extension. Plus you can say the phrase ‘browser extension’ just not the exact name of it, because that could encourage users to download something that may or may not be dangerous, and the ST doesn't want to risk it

Mozboz

Support! Those pages need a glowup.

Stottstotts35

Scratch 4.0 is tommorrow

Mozboz

Stottstotts35 wrote:
Scratch 4.0 is tommorrow

No it's not.

Rosics

sonic__fan wrote:
TheDumbRat wrote:
You can do that usinga -snip- in the setting “Scratch 2.0 to 3.0”!
Firstly, please don't mention browser extensions. It goes against this policy.
Secondly, what if I'm using a school or library computer and can't download browser extensions? What if I don't want to use an extension?

“Scratch Extension” is not a specific extension.

Stottstotts35

ok

ScratchieChan3695

That is actually so pepper steak!

NotK3ndricAltAgain

I LOVE this suggestion!!! Honestly I don’t see anything wrong with this at all. The pages do look with the 3.0 design tbh. And I like the style of the My Stuff page! It looks very simple, which makes it more easier to use for New Scratchers. I also like that on the main Discuss page, it has big text saying Discuss Scratch just to tell you that your on the Discuss page, and that you used the Pen colour. Definitely gives that feeling that your not on the main site, but rather the forums. I also like that on the profile page, you can change the user headline colour. I’d go with a dark-ish blue one, (probably #003f66.) And again, I don’t see anything wrong with this at all!

mumu245

iiucandyfloss wrote:
(#632)
MousePotato1234 wrote:
In all honesty, the whole extension policy just seems overly strict. If you are overtly endorsing or advertising for an extension, though I personally wouldn't do it, I see why you'd censor the post or comment. But when somebody is just mentioning an extension or addon, that's when things go too far. It should be changed, but here comes the ST putting that on their very official list of rejected suggestions. One word for it all: censorship. $1,000,000 says the ST will censor me for daring to do so much as to *gasp* question them!
It's because some browser extensions might be dangerous, and the Scratch Team can't exactly check every browser extension. Plus you can say the phrase ‘browser extension’ just not the exact name of it, because that could encourage users to download something that may or may not be dangerous, and the ST doesn't want to risk it

Except this decision isn't very logical. Why target browser extensions when there's much worse software?

mingo-gag

Support I wouldn't mind a new design on scratch. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a new design for scratch for 4.0 but we will see what happens.

Discuss Scratch