delete completely unused accounts (not rejected)

MonkeyBean2

I suggest adding another requirement that the user has not confirmed their email. Also, an email should be sent a month before, and a few days before the account is deleted, warning the user, while also saying that they can ignore the message if they did not sign up for scratch.
Also, I don't think previously created accounts should be deleted if this were to be implemented.

Funquat

George24681 wrote:
scampton_the_great wrote:
coder2310 wrote:
scampton_the_great wrote:
George24681 wrote:
I feel like it should be relatively active, as in not a SINGLE comment, but not impossibly active. Maybe 2 comments a week is about enough?
What if someone takes a short 1 week break, or if someone goes on holiday to somewhere without wifi for a week? I don't like this part
That's why this suggestion is for six months, and only for if they do little to nothing after account creation.
I am aware of this, but I was responding to the post, not the topic in general.
I meant, like, 2 comments a week for a period of time would be enough to prove to the ST that you're active.
Maybe 2 comments a week for 3 weeks?

No I don`t think this is how it would work, from my understanding it would only work after a year or something similar, even then differently, If you have an account without a pfp, without a description or without any projects then only after a year of no activity since account creation then the acc would then be deleted.

WinterCat18

A-MARIO-PLAYER wrote:
note: this is NOT rejected. the rejection in TOLORS links to this post as “not rejected.”

automatically delete accounts that meet all of these requirements:
have no projects (counting shared and unshared projects)
have an empty about me and wiwo and a default pfp
are over 6 months old since join date
have never performed a social action (commenting, remixing, love, fav, following, forum posting. etc)
are a new scratcher and not part of scratch team
tl;dr. automatically delete accounts older than 6 months that have basically not done anything. their only activity (besides anything not requiring an account) will just be joining scratch.

just, idk if this is rejected, but this can save storage space a lot. some people will register an account, and forget about doing anything on it. this wastes several bytes of storage that could be used for some actual, real users.

the username can then be taken by someone else, preventing very special and rare usernames from being taken by people who refuse to connect with the scratch community.

This is rejected.

WinterCat18

A-MARIO-PLAYER wrote:
note: this is NOT rejected. the rejection in TOLORS links to this post as “not rejected.”

automatically delete accounts that meet all of these requirements:
have no projects (counting shared and unshared projects)
have an empty about me and wiwo and a default pfp
are over 6 months old since join date
have never performed a social action (commenting, remixing, love, fav, following, forum posting. etc)
are a new scratcher and not part of scratch team
tl;dr. automatically delete accounts older than 6 months that have basically not done anything. their only activity (besides anything not requiring an account) will just be joining scratch.

just, idk if this is rejected, but this can save storage space a lot. some people will register an account, and forget about doing anything on it. this wastes several bytes of storage that could be used for some actual, real users.

the username can then be taken by someone else, preventing very special and rare usernames from being taken by people who refuse to connect with the scratch community.

This is rejected.

medians

WinterCat18 wrote:
This is rejected.

You are not meant to quote the original post, and the top of the original post that you quoted states that it is not rejected in big, bold characters. The Official List of Rejected Suggestions states that it is not
Also, you said this twice

Last edited by medians (July 12, 2025 15:48:32)

lfg30700

Bump

mtaka4

Support, since scratch's servers basically need this

Last edited by mtaka4 (Aug. 4, 2025 03:33:39)

FeelingHammy417

Medium support. What if it's like an account made by someone's parent or guardian for a little kid thats turning older so they can use scratch? If their parent makes it already, when they log into the acccount they will find out it doesnt exist and may have to contact the scratch team about it, so I'm not so sure about this update since lots of people do this.

da-ultimate-creater

FeelingHammy417 wrote:
Medium support. What if it's like an account made by someone's parent or guardian for a little kid thats turning older so they can use scratch? If their parent makes it already, when they log into the acccount they will find out it doesnt exist and may have to contact the scratch team about it, so I'm not so sure about this update since lots of people do this.

So the parent/guardian is going to make an account for their child 6 months in advance?

coder2310

FeelingHammy417 wrote:
Medium support. What if it's like an account made by someone's parent or guardian for a little kid thats turning older so they can use scratch? If their parent makes it already, when they log into the acccount they will find out it doesnt exist and may have to contact the scratch team about it, so I'm not so sure about this update since lots of people do this.

No one does this, like, seriously. Why create an account for the future when you can just do it when the child actually wants to join scratch. There's no benefits to doing this beforehand.

Limbo-Key

you should also delete student bot accounts since abunch of teacher accounts setup bots to take alot of namesnipes such as all 3 letter usernames being taken by teacher accounts that setup bots

Bitebite12

Limbo-Key wrote:
you should also delete student bot accounts since abunch of teacher accounts setup bots to take alot of namesnipes such as all 3 letter usernames being taken by teacher accounts that setup bots

How would they know if its a bot?

epicdude512

Funquat wrote:
Bro MY ACCOUNT IS UNUSED during the night so basically you are thinking ban all scratchers

_E-J_ wrote:
DUPE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and rejected

This is for accounts that have been created and then abandoned and had no activity (meaning they just made the account and did nothing else), by posting on this suggestion you guys would be completely safe if this suggestion was added

PIXEL_BY_PIXEL_ERROR

alright I am tired of people saying this is rejected and stuff. It says rejected for other (possible related) stuff but you can discuss it ON THIS THREAD. Additionally, this feature is for people who have had NO activity at all (meaning no projects (unshared or shared), no favorites, no loves, any of those.

koalapet1

Paddle2See wrote:
Za-Chary wrote:
Gamer_Logan819 wrote:
unused do not equal inactive
Sure, but “unused” is a subset of “inactive.” As a result, “deleting unused accounts” is rejected since “deleting inactive accounts” is rejected.
No - I don't think that's how that works. If an account is totally unused (has created nothing on Scratch other than the account) - that's different from an account that has become inactive after being active for some period of time. I personally would not have an issue with removing accounts that had never been active.

i rather the team deleting the unused account if they didn't make a project and that means the website will save some stuff

PaperMarioFan2024

Bump the suggestion next time, please…

Also like to bring up this as it was stated already in #1 of the OP, this isn’t rejected under deleting completely unused accounts and inactive accounts since account creation as stated in section 8.5 in TOLORS (the Official List of Rejected Suggestions) and the following topic which is this one was linked below the rejection statement so therefore, this topic is still relevant and can still be discussed.

Imtwentytenth

koalapet1 wrote:
Paddle2See wrote:
Za-Chary wrote:
Gamer_Logan819 wrote:
unused do not equal inactive
Sure, but “unused” is a subset of “inactive.” As a result, “deleting unused accounts” is rejected since “deleting inactive accounts” is rejected.
No - I don't think that's how that works. If an account is totally unused (has created nothing on Scratch other than the account) - that's different from an account that has become inactive after being active for some period of time. I personally would not have an issue with removing accounts that had never been active.
i rather the team deleting the unused account if they didn't make a project and that means the website will save some stuff

But what if an account is mainly is for some experiments or something else not about creating projects? That's gonna be hurting for accounts that didn't know the update came out and they haven't created a project.

PIXEL_BY_PIXEL_ERROR

Imtwentytenth wrote:
koalapet1 wrote:
Paddle2See wrote:
Za-Chary wrote:
Gamer_Logan819 wrote:
unused do not equal inactive
Sure, but “unused” is a subset of “inactive.” As a result, “deleting unused accounts” is rejected since “deleting inactive accounts” is rejected.
No - I don't think that's how that works. If an account is totally unused (has created nothing on Scratch other than the account) - that's different from an account that has become inactive after being active for some period of time. I personally would not have an issue with removing accounts that had never been active.
snip
But what if an account is mainly is for some experiments or something else not about creating projects? That's gonna be hurting for accounts that didn't know the update came out and they haven't created a project.

its for any activity in general

Last edited by PIXEL_BY_PIXEL_ERROR (Sept. 8, 2025 13:21:29)

General_Skywalker66

Pretty good idea, I think.

coder2310

bump

Discuss Scratch