This is what the cat ears will look like:


Just in case anyone wanted to see.
Source: https://github.com/scratchfoundation/scratch-www/blob/4b78cf803a95272f6e289a0fb1a9fbc264e2dcef/static/svgs/membership/cat-ears.svg

Ok when I clicked on the Git link I saw a Mii PFP (I could be wrong and by all means go ahead and correct me) I know a ST user who has a Mii PFP,

Anyways

bayaan wrote:

Now the cat blocks would they still do it for april fools and just an —- for members permanently? Because I don't think we've had cat blocks for quite some time and —– exist for them, so not really sure where they would go with that.

Uh most people don't know that exists I mean we have over 150 Million uses compare that to the people who have gotten the Outsider thing (which is less)

redspacecat wrote:

This is what the cat ears will look like:

-I removed this myself-

Anyway, that's what it looks like?

Isn't this rejected by the ST themselves? Weird that they'd contradict themselves without retracting previous statements

8.2 Add a rank above Scratcher or allow users to skip the New Scratcher status
There are three ranks: New Scratcher, Scratcher, and Scratch Team. The only reason the New Scratcher rank exists is to prevent spam, and since it only takes a few weeks to become a Scratcher, bullying and separation are rather minimal. Similarly, the Scratch Team rank exists so users know who is on the Scratch Team; note that Scratch Team members do not brag about the Scratch Team rank. In contrast, there may be division in the community between Scratchers and those with a higher rank, which could also lead to bragging and bullying. This also includes a “verified Scratcher” status where well-known Scratchers get a special symbol next to their name; for more information in the case where a Scratcher is famous outside of Scratch, see this post.

In particular, this suggestion includes a “Former Scratch Team Member” rank as well as a “Youth Advisory Board” rank, as account ranks in general are intended to identify who has access to certain features. For more information, see this post.

Although the restrictions for New Scratchers may seem annoying, they are extremely effective against spam and inappropriate content. For New Scratchers who are wondering how to become a Scratcher or what it means to be one, check out this topic. The Scratch Team will not allow any accounts to “skip” the New Scratcher status, even if it is an alternate account of an existing account.

(source: tolors, suggestions forum)
Wouldn't members having exclusive avatar decorations make the community view them as a higher rank?

Who are we designing Scratch for?

We're designing Scratch for kids of all genders, experienced users, educators, and especially people with very little or no experience programming. We take feedback from all these people – through meetings, workshops, emails, and these forums – when designing Scratch.

(source: scratch design goals sticky, suggestions forum)
Surely this would include kids who can't afford memberships?

2D4eter wrote:

(#7)
The exclusive sprite packs just won't work. Either one of 2 things will happen with them if they are kept:
- They become normal non-exclusive sprites after someone shares them
OR
- Scratch tries to stop people sharing or using them, back tracking on the entire idea of remixing.

It just won't work.

Just to clarify, the exclusive sprites are meant to be early access, and the ST will not try to stop people from sharing them.

8xa wrote:

Isn't this rejected by the ST themselves? Weird that they'd contradict themselves without retracting previous statements

It's not the first time they have gone back on a rejection. Showing PFPs in the forums was one rejected.
Anyway,

Za-Chary wrote:

We'll have to wait until these changes go live before I edit the topic.

so the TOLoRS will be updated when/if the updates come out.

2D4eter wrote:

The exclusive sprite packs just won't work. Either one of 2 things will happen with them if they are kept:
- They become normal non-exclusive sprites after someone shares them
OR
- Scratch tries to stop people sharing or using them, back tracking on the entire idea of remixing.

It just won't work.

The sprites aren't exclusive, just early access.

There are 2 reviewers if you looked at the link, one of them approved the change the other one (ST user) still hasn't approved it yet so whatever happens

For some reason Scratch's filter keeps falsely flagging this as inappropriate, so I'm just going to upload what I wanted to say as an image instead.


Kiwi

minikiwigeek2 wrote:

Snip

Maybe you should have said the Elon site, either I do see the issue, however we have to wait whether that last reviewer approves the change or not

Why? I hate how Scratch is steering this way.

8xa wrote:

Isn't this rejected by the ST themselves? Weird that they'd contradict themselves without retracting previous statements

8.2 Add a rank above Scratcher or allow users to skip the New Scratcher status
There are three ranks: New Scratcher, Scratcher, and Scratch Team. The only reason the New Scratcher rank exists is to prevent spam, and since it only takes a few weeks to become a Scratcher, bullying and separation are rather minimal. Similarly, the Scratch Team rank exists so users know who is on the Scratch Team; note that Scratch Team members do not brag about the Scratch Team rank. In contrast, there may be division in the community between Scratchers and those with a higher rank, which could also lead to bragging and bullying. This also includes a “verified Scratcher” status where well-known Scratchers get a special symbol next to their name; for more information in the case where a Scratcher is famous outside of Scratch, see this post.

In particular, this suggestion includes a “Former Scratch Team Member” rank as well as a “Youth Advisory Board” rank, as account ranks in general are intended to identify who has access to certain features. For more information, see this post.

Although the restrictions for New Scratchers may seem annoying, they are extremely effective against spam and inappropriate content. For New Scratchers who are wondering how to become a Scratcher or what it means to be one, check out this topic. The Scratch Team will not allow any accounts to “skip” the New Scratcher status, even if it is an alternate account of an existing account.

(source: tolors, suggestions forum)
Wouldn't members having exclusive avatar decorations make the community view them as a higher rank?

Who are we designing Scratch for?

We're designing Scratch for kids of all genders, experienced users, educators, and especially people with very little or no experience programming. We take feedback from all these people – through meetings, workshops, emails, and these forums – when designing Scratch.

(source: scratch design goals sticky, suggestions forum)
Surely this would include kids who can't afford memberships?

EXACTLY!

minikiwigeek2 wrote:

For some reason Scratch's filter keeps falsely flagging this as inappropriate, so I'm just going to upload what I wanted to say as an image instead.

I'm trying not to engage with discussion about these changes for obvious reasons, but I do want to point out that the difference between Scratch and X is that X removed the original verification functionality, whereas Scratch isn't really removing anything that already existed. I assumed the main backlash with X wasn't the pay-for-badge mechanic, it was the removal of the actual verification system.

Whether or not this difference is relevant (or if I'm even correct), I don't know. But it is a difference worth mentioning.

Za-Chary wrote:

But it is a difference worth mentioning.

That's true. If Scratch maintains its current verification system, it could work well. However, there is the self-esteem side of things. And the tiers. And all the other doubts you guys are having - but it is possible. If moderated well, and done in a way that makes sure everyone knows it's not a rank, it's a symbol that you donated. Similar to how charities use donation ranks to recognize and thank donors for different levels of charity, I'm sure the Scratch Team can implement this in a way that is more of a thank you than a reward.

An idea for this is if there was also a similar cat ear by your profile for donating at all. You could donate 1 dollar and get this other cat ear. This way, even kids who aren't in a financial position to get the membership can still have the cat ear on their profile. And the difference between the two cats could be pretty small, that way little kids don't feel less than. It can be a way to include everyone while increasing the actual amount of donations.

All in all, this could indeed be a slippery slope… but if the Scratch Team finds a way to hold on tight, then this feature could be really cool and fun, without making people feel bad about not being a member.

8xa wrote:

Isn't this rejected by the ST themselves? Weird that they'd contradict themselves without retracting previous statements

You do have to keep in mind that many of those posts (whether rejections, guidelines, etc.) were made close to or even over 10 years ago. A lot has changed since then and with it, Scratch's goals have changed as well. They know likely that they're contradicting themselves (I'm not sure how many Scratch Team members actually know what TOLORS is, but assuming they do). But if they publicly announced that “XYZ is now unrejected”, that may lead to a lot of unnecessary speculation or anticipation.

I know that they are currently considering features/suggestions that are on TOLORS and seemingly violate their design goals mentioned in the stickied topic. So, I wouldn't be surprised to be if “rejected” suggestions start being implemented in the near future.

Scratch is going to become like a certain typing program.

By the way, this is what the member badge might look like (from messing around in that pull request's code to force the account navigation and avatar to show):

These people aren't even Scratch Team members.

jen6C wrote:

These people aren't even Scratch Team members.

But Scratch Team members are responsible for accepting or denying the pull requests (source)
Note that I don't use Github so there's probably someone else better equipped to to talk about this but I'm pretty sure Scratch Team are involved in the decision of whether the features get added

jen6C wrote:

(#37)
These people aren't even Scratch Team members.

if a pull request links to a “UEPR” issue, which means it's on the ST's private issue tracker, generally it's safe to assume that it is from an actual ST member (or well, a Scratch developer at least)

8xa wrote:

jen6C wrote:

These people aren't even Scratch Team members.

But Scratch Team members are responsible for accepting or denying the pull requests (source)
Note that I don't use Github so there's probably someone else better equipped to to talk about this but I'm pretty sure Scratch Team are involved in the decision of whether the features get added

I know, but still. Also, rosics has submitted a pull request on Github adding a huge membership promo at the bottom of the page.
They say it’s a great idea and that they support Scratch paywalling features.
I’ve talked to them about it being intrusive, but they keep on continuing.