an idea for moderation!!

cinnamonXrose

Hello! So there have been a couple of things going on in Scratch, and I want to propose a couple suggestions for ways to solve them!
However, there may be downsides, but again everything has downsides. (Except mangoes. Mangoes are delicious.) I hope these ideas will have more upsides than downsides. I know I might be a gwdfier, which means I must be “problematic”, but I want to solve problems for the good of Scratch.
The problem is: spammers. Spammers will spam inappropriate and hurtful words on places where there are lots of people will be. This can cause people to feel offended, or just want to leave Scratch just because someone's spamming.

There have been threads talking about a way to block Scratchers, but a problem with that is people could block a Scratcher for no reason! The block and report idea is also a great idea, but that thread got closed, so I can't really discuss about it there.

So because my other ideas were rejected by most scratchers, I chose one that I feel like could work. If there was a way that Scratch could limit the amount of accounts per device, that would limit the spammer's ability to just create more accounts when they get banned! If Scratch can IP ban someone, then they could probably do this as well. Also, I don't think spammers have hundreds of devices or email accounts laying around. This may anger people who make thousands of alts, but it may just help!

Last edited by cinnamonXrose (Nov. 28, 2024 22:14:22)

o97doge

I think Scratcher moderation, even in specific areas, is not a good idea. Moderation by definition means looking at content and reports, and having kids looking at inappropriate stuff, even to moderate it, isn't a good idea.

Also, if a Scratcher is is violating Scratch rules, the Scratch Team should know so they can stop them from doing it site-wide.

Last edited by o97doge (Nov. 28, 2024 03:28:28)

han614698

first off mangoes are disgusting.

How could studios vote to block someone? Would their name be public? Voting isn't a good idea because it publicly names and shames that person.

The ST doesn't condone chatrooms - rather they have said that Scratch isn't really the place for chatrooms, so they're not going to pay a moderator just to moderate specific chatrooms (which shouldn't really exist).

Scratchers cannot mod the website - that is a rejected suggestion,. You must work for the ST in order to be a moderator.

cinnamonXrose

o97doge wrote:
I think Scratcher moderation, even in specific areas, is not a good idea. Moderation, by definition, means looking at content and reports, and having kids looking at inappropriate stuff, even to moderate it, isn't a good idea.

Also, if a Scratcher is is violating Scratch rules, the Scratch Team should know so they can stop them from doing it site-wide.

Yes, but I'm not sure if one of the ST members would want to babysit a chatroom, also Griffpatch's profile, for example gets spammed with inappropriate content almost daily, and even if ST bans the spammer, they always come back on a different profile. I'm just worried about the younger Scratchers, because they shouldn't have to deal with this kind of stuff.

han614698

cinnamonXrose wrote:
(#4)
o97doge wrote:
I think Scratcher moderation, even in specific areas, is not a good idea. Moderation, by definition, means looking at content and reports, and having kids looking at inappropriate stuff, even to moderate it, isn't a good idea.

Also, if a Scratcher is is violating Scratch rules, the Scratch Team should know so they can stop them from doing it site-wide.

Yes, but I'm not sure if one of the ST members would want to babysit a chatroom, also Griffpatch's profile, for example gets spammed with inappropriate content almost daily, and even if ST bans the spammer, they always come back on a different profile. I'm just worried about the younger Scratchers, because they shouldn't have to deal with this kind of stuff.

So who do you propose moderates these spaces?

cinnamonXrose

han614698 wrote:
cinnamonXrose wrote:
(#4)
o97doge wrote:
I think Scratcher moderation, even in specific areas, is not a good idea. Moderation, by definition, means looking at content and reports, and having kids looking at inappropriate stuff, even to moderate it, isn't a good idea.

Also, if a Scratcher is is violating Scratch rules, the Scratch Team should know so they can stop them from doing it site-wide.

Yes, but I'm not sure if one of the ST members would want to babysit a chatroom, also Griffpatch's profile, for example gets spammed with inappropriate content almost daily, and even if ST bans the spammer, they always come back on a different profile. I'm just worried about the younger Scratchers, because they shouldn't have to deal with this kind of stuff.
So who do you propose moderates these spaces?

If that idea does get accepted, I'll leave that up to Scratch. They may have different ideas than I do, which is fine.

han614698

cinnamonXrose wrote:
han614698 wrote:
cinnamonXrose wrote:
(#4)
o97doge wrote:
I think Scratcher moderation, even in specific areas, is not a good idea. Moderation, by definition, means looking at content and reports, and having kids looking at inappropriate stuff, even to moderate it, isn't a good idea.

Also, if a Scratcher is is violating Scratch rules, the Scratch Team should know so they can stop them from doing it site-wide.

Yes, but I'm not sure if one of the ST members would want to babysit a chatroom, also Griffpatch's profile, for example gets spammed with inappropriate content almost daily, and even if ST bans the spammer, they always come back on a different profile. I'm just worried about the younger Scratchers, because they shouldn't have to deal with this kind of stuff.
So who do you propose moderates these spaces?
If that idea does get accepted, I'll leave that up to Scratch. They may have different ideas than I do, which is fine.

I hate to break it to you, but the only people to moderate the website will be Scratch Team members.

This means that they would have to pay someone JUST to moderate studios which they don’t even want on the site on the first place. (Pretty sure studios such as GWDFI have been discussed for deletion multiple times). Not happening, as nice as it would be.

alpha_ape_13

One only mangoes in juice form is delicous

1. Report spammers if they're causing drama so the Scratch Team can know about it. If you don't think that has worked then try Contact us

2. I think the vote to Block and report could be abused to cause false reports

3. I don't think the ST can moderate each chatroom efficiently (Besides chatrooms are not the point of Scratch)

Last edited by alpha_ape_13 (Nov. 28, 2024 15:47:52)

cinnamonXrose

alpha_ape_13 wrote:
One only mangoes in juice form is delicous

1. Report spammers if they're causing drama so the Scratch Team can know about it. If you don't think that has worked then try Contact us

2. I think the vote to Block and report could be abused to cause false reports

3. I don't think the ST can moderate each chatroom efficiently (Besides chatrooms are not the point of Scratch)

Sadly, if the one breaking the guidelines does get banned, they almost always come back on a different account and continue to do what they were doing before. The vote to block and report would also basically be the same thing as the block and report, but multiple people would have to vote.

(@Za-Chary) It would not really bury the problem, because it would also send a report to the Scratch Team. This way the Scratch Team will be notified of any disrespectful comments. The system would act similarly to the report system in that, if too many “block-reports” are sent without a good reason, the user who sent the block-report might get an alert.

Like @Za-Chary states, if the report was false, then the users who sent the block and report would get an alert. In addition more people would have to vote to block them instead of just one person trying to block them. You have to put a little trust in the Scratchers, however. Also, some of the other chatrooms don't need as much moderation because they can easily close the comments, but it's mostly Griffpatch's profile, that has no rules, and ST has to close his comments, so he's probably not online much to close them himself. This makes his profile a big target for all the guideline breakers.

mastergamerx-details

han614698 wrote:
first off mangoes are disgusting.

Last edited by mastergamerx-details (Nov. 28, 2024 16:33:02)

sideyard

This is with the barebones assumption that the Scratch moderation is full of false-positives (which it is not, mostly). Scratch is as fine as it is currently. I understand that some people are concerned about being falsely moderated, but this is not an excuse.

Last edited by sideyard (Nov. 28, 2024 19:43:50)

cinnamonXrose

sideyard wrote:
This is with the barebones assumption that the Scratch moderation is full of false-positives (which it is not, mostly). Scratch is as fine as it is currently. I understand that some people are concerned about being falsely moderated, but this is not an excuse.

If you don't know already, there have been tons of spammers spamming inappropriate and hurtful stuff, but every time they get banned, they always come back on a new account and continue spamming.

TheAutocorrectingCat

Please make separate topics for each suggestion, rather than making a list of them.

600th post lolol

Last edited by TheAutocorrectingCat (Nov. 28, 2024 23:07:03)

cinnamonXrose

TheAutocorrectingCat wrote:
Please make separate topics for each suggestion, rather than making a list of them.

I was just about to change it to one idea lol

han614698

cinnamonXrose wrote:
(#12)
sideyard wrote:
This is with the barebones assumption that the Scratch moderation is full of false-positives (which it is not, mostly). Scratch is as fine as it is currently. I understand that some people are concerned about being falsely moderated, but this is not an excuse.
If you don't know already, there have been tons of spammers spamming inappropriate and hurtful stuff, but every time they get banned, they always come back on a new account and continue spamming.

This suggestion wouldn't really fix that.

Additionally, it is rejected for non-Scratch Team members to be moderators:

7.4 Allow Scratchers to moderate the website
A community moderator program used to exist where Scratchers could moderate the website, but it was removed due to some very inappropriate things showing up in the report queue, among other reasons. A volunteer program could also encourage trolls to use moderator tools to cause problems on the website. As a result, the Scratch Team has decided to only allow adults to moderate the website, including the forums, and those adults would need to join the Scratch Team as a paid position in order to moderate the website.

If you are 18 or older, legally allowed to work in the United States, and are interested in moderating the website, check out the “Jobs” link at the bottom of the website to see if there are any openings for the “Community Moderator” position.

cheddargirl

cinnamonXrose wrote:
However, there may be downsides, but again everything has downsides. (Except mangoes. Mangoes are delicious.)

I'm afraid that fruit allergies are a thing, and people with mango allergies would unfortunately disagree with that statement.

Which unfortunately means there is a potential downside to the (revised) suggestion about stopping spam.

cinnamonXrose wrote:
If there was a way that Scratch could limit the amount of accounts per device, that would limit the spammer's ability to just create more accounts when they get banned!

We tried something like this at one point in the past during the 1.x days. This unfortunately caused complications with school/library computers or shared family devices if one person acted badly. Recent changes in the legal landscape since then may also make this idea possibly illegal nowadays or impossible to work on certain devices that restrict tracking.

scratchcode1_2_3

cheddargirl wrote:
(#16)
We tried something like this at one point in the past during the 1.x days. This unfortunately caused complications with school/library computers or shared family devices if one person acted badly. Recent changes in the legal landscape since then may also make this idea possibly illegal nowadays or impossible to work on certain devices that restrict tracking.

huh, illegal? I've seen many sites before that can hardware ban you? or is it like a new upcoming law?

BigNate469

cheddargirl wrote:
cinnamonXrose wrote:
However, there may be downsides, but again everything has downsides. (Except mangoes. Mangoes are delicious.)
I'm afraid that fruit allergies are a thing, and people with mango allergies would unfortunately disagree with that statement.

Myself included.

Although I can't actually speak to what mangos taste like, if I tried to eat one I would go into anaphylactic shock and have to be sent to the ER to have any real chance of surviving.

I'll stop going off-topic now.

I ask that anyone who wants to further discuss mango allergies do so on my profile

cheddargirl

scratchcode1_2_3 wrote:
cheddargirl wrote:
(#16)
We tried something like this at one point in the past during the 1.x days. This unfortunately caused complications with school/library computers or shared family devices if one person acted badly. Recent changes in the legal landscape since then may also make this idea possibly illegal nowadays or impossible to work on certain devices that restrict tracking.

huh, illegal? I've seen many sites before that can hardware ban you? or is it like a new upcoming law?

The ability to hardware-ban is dependent on purpose and jurisdiction involved. Notably, we are dealing with a userbase that is primarily underage and or using it for edu purposes, which makes it iffy.

For something like a for-profit MMO game website with 13+ players, they may have legal grounds to justify hardware ban usage. For an edu website where the ramifications might be huge (like on a school computer or shared family device), less likely justified. We'd probably have to consult with lawyers if we do have grounds to do a hardware ban and under what conditions, but the general sense is that it might not be okay considering our purpose and userbase.

Last edited by cheddargirl (Nov. 29, 2024 02:26:48)

cinnamonXrose

cheddargirl wrote:
cinnamonXrose wrote:
However, there may be downsides, but again everything has downsides. (Except mangoes. Mangoes are delicious.)
I'm afraid that fruit allergies are a thing, and people with mango allergies would unfortunately disagree with that statement.

Which unfortunately means there is a potential downside to the (revised) suggestion about stopping spam.

cinnamonXrose wrote:
If there was a way that Scratch could limit the amount of accounts per device, that would limit the spammer's ability to just create more accounts when they get banned!
We tried something like this at one point in the past during the 1.x days. This unfortunately caused complications with school/library computers or shared family devices if one person acted badly. Recent changes in the legal landscape since then may also make this idea possibly illegal nowadays or impossible to work on certain devices that restrict tracking.

ok that makes sense

Discuss Scratch