no, it's pretty important, like the edit marker. It'd be pretty confusing if it didn't appear. It also tells the user what they did wrong, which is useful
it says "last edited by " under the post too anyways

Xx-Gradient-xX wrote:

I'm sorry to add to the messages, but this is a very old topic, and we shouldn't continue it. Please do not add anything more, this topic is resolved, thank you.

???
I think you're getting confused with Questions About Scratch. Suggestions can't get “resolved” / closed unless A) they're rejected, B) they're accepted, C) they're a duplicate or D) it leads to heavy flaming (i've seen it happen!)

I don't find an issue with the [Removed by ST] text replacement. Obviously if the entire post has to be removed, just remove the post. But the only instances of [Removed by ST] are naming-and-shaming instances where the actual post content was fine outside of said naming and shaming, and old posts from before the extension policy that had extensions named in them. I think these are fine.

no support the resaon it says removed by st is to limit drama to a minimum

I agree that this would prevent stigma around users who have had things removed from their profiles or studios or whatnot, but removing an entire sentence or paragraph is quite overboard. And removing just the bad part might make something unclear.

Why can't they just use [Removed] instead? Then it could be the user themselves removing something and being about to change it later, or an ST member. It's ambiguous, which provides the perfect cover for users who have done minor rule breaks e.g. saying ‘ughh (mild swear word) Snape, he’s so annoying!! or the like.

jonsonfan wrote:

no support the resaon it says removed by st is to limit drama to a minimum

How does that keep drama to a minimum? Everyone knows that only the studio host can remove things from the description, so there's no drama. And profiles and project descriptions and things aren't anyone else's things so they can't complain. So really there's already no drama from this.

Sometimes the scratch puts that when in reality there is nothing wrong with it (but if you put inappropriate things obviously they will censor you)

when green flag clicked
forever
say [removed by ST]
end

glitcX wrote:

It's naming and shaming which is not allowed.

I don't think there is currently an issue about (removed by scratch team) placeholders giving Scratchers bad reputations outside of the topics they appeared in. Nonetheless, if there is, or one arrises, support because of that.

I support this, it seems like it wouldbe a minor hate in a way, since your telling the enitre community on the topic that tey said a bad word/listed a browser extention, ect ect