Do NOT add the new Scratch Membership paywalled features.

mingo-gag

If you look at the link there are 2 reviewers, one of them approved the changed, This is the other reviewer it's their choose to approve it or not

Just saying

Object_3

Rosics wrote:
I have a feeling this backlash will be worse than the color change in 2023..

mingo-gag wrote:
Ok then how are they going to Justify that $35 Price or $150 for Lifetime

Also Like to bring up the Outsider thing which has more features than the Membership.
Umm, other things OFF of Scratch?

Oh and yeah, Cat Blocks will also be a part of this subscription. So they couldn't bring it back for April Fools but for a MEMBERSHIP?

Now this is just an assumption, and I haven't been on scratch for a while so I don't know if they talked about no scratch blocks last April fools…but I'm guessing they didn't add scratch blocks so people would be more encouraged to buy their subscription once it came out.

PaperMarioFan2024

What (removed by moderator - please keep it polite) are the people on the GitHub PR committee thinking with this? Have they seen the backlash they’ve gotten with the color changing transition already?? What are people gonna think when they decide to launch a paywall membership subscription that barely has enough to justify whatever price tag they’ll decide on?!

I do not approve of this. They need to reconsider this.

Edit: Forgot you can’t say minor swear words in here. My mistake, ST.

Last edited by PaperMarioFan2024 (Nov. 20, 2025 12:34:05)

unconstructable13

even amp agrees this stuff shouldn't be added

NanoRook

Sasha_Banks272 wrote:
NanoRook wrote:
Sasha_Banks272 wrote:
So do you just not see the problem?
That's about account rank, not avatar decorators. I guess you could argue they're similar and therefore could lead to a similar consequence but not really. Nobody is going to get a sense of superiority over others because they donated to a nonprofit and now their avatar is orange.
I understand that people like you and I are older mature enough to understand that doing stuff like that is very immature. But mind you, Scratch is filled with little children who have yet to understand that concept.

That's valid, I hadn't considered that.

mingo-gag wrote:
If you look at the link there are 2 reviewers, one of them approved the changed, This is the other reviewer it's their choose to approve it or not

Just saying

He's a reviewer in the context of reviewing the pull request to make sure it looks good before it's merged into the site. That does not mean him rejecting the PR would permanently stop the feature from being implemented, or that the decision to implement the feature rests solely with him.

unconstructable13 wrote:
even amp agrees this stuff shouldn't be added

redspacecat

NanoRook wrote:
unconstructable13 wrote:
even amp agrees this stuff shouldn't be added

@AmpElectrecuted

Last edited by redspacecat (Nov. 20, 2025 15:14:34)

ajskateboarder

mingo-gag wrote:
Ok then how are they going to Justify that $35 Price or $150 for Lifetime

It's pretty fair when you consider it to be for donations, although a Scratch membership doesn't make it sound very obvious

MagicCoder330 wrote:
we must also not forget that this can go the other way around (“LMAO look at timmy, he can't afford a membership…”). This would make more bullying on the site.

The membership process seems to be framed as parents paying for it on behalf of a user. This sorta behavior would make sense for like YouTube donations or channel memberships, but I can't really see this creating new bragging behavior on Scratch, that can't already be done by showing off some expensive thing.

Also, you aren't gonna be able to negotiate in pull requests with people trying to do their jobs

Last edited by ajskateboarder (Nov. 20, 2025 00:34:21)

thedolphin_

medians wrote:
I was just gonna say this:
Title: Please reconsider this GitHub PR :/
Post:
If no one knows what I'm talking about, there is a pull request on scratch-www called "[UEPR-399] Add avatar badges to Scratch Members." I thought this would be rejected for similar reasons to 8.2 and 8.8 (like where it says people would try to brag or say that they are better than others), and it just doesn't feel like what Scratch is supposed to be.

Yeah, Scratch is slowly breaking it's own beliefs.

StudioPangoFan_2000

medians wrote:
I was just gonna say this:
Title: Please reconsider this GitHub PR :/
Post:
If no one knows what I'm talking about, there is a pull request on scratch-www called "[UEPR-399] Add avatar badges to Scratch Members." I thought this would be rejected for similar reasons to 8.2 and 8.8 (like where it says people would try to brag or say that they are better than others), and it just doesn't feel like what Scratch is supposed to be.

Scratch is going against their own policies that a former ST member (Za-Chary) made. I do agree, medians, Scratch isn't the same. At this point let's just all move to AmpMod. That will always be free. See ampmod.codeberg.page

Last edited by StudioPangoFan_2000 (Nov. 20, 2025 01:15:36)

Rosics

unconstructable13 wrote:
even amp agrees this stuff shouldn't be added

he still knows i exist since he lurks forums !!

At this point, we can't just bully ST, we gotta just help them do the right thing!

StudioPangoFan_2000

Rosics wrote:
unconstructable13 wrote:
even amp agrees this stuff shouldn't be added
he still knows i exist since he lurks forums !!

At this point, we can't just bully ST, we gotta just help them do the right thing!

We're not bullying ST. We're critisizing them. It's like a Republic that does one action and everything all goes wrong. That's how I think this is all going to turn out.

Dan0da0man

Rosics wrote:
-snip-
Oh and yeah, Cat Blocks will also be a part of this subscription. So they couldn't bring it back for April Fools but for a MEMBERSHIP?

are we serious? putting a permanently rejected suggestion behind a paywall now???? what has scratch come to

mingo-gag

I'm questioning why ST isn't going to respond to this topic

mali3000

mingo-gag wrote:
I'm questioning why ST isn't going to respond to this topic

they usually dont respond to even the most wanted suggestions, and this one only has two pages

pippy2011eight

okay, this is b@d, at first it was fine, but CAT BLOCKS! THE BEST BLOCKS! REALLY! but on the bright side I can use it for my SATCH arc.

Edit: Why did it censor bad?

Last edited by pippy2011eight (Nov. 20, 2025 04:09:34)

Za-Chary

StudioPangoFan_2000 wrote:
Scratch is going against their own policies that a former ST member (Za-Chary) made.

Hold up, I didn't make these policies. Other Scratch Team members stated their rejections (not “policies”), and I forwarded their messages. Note that the status of rejected suggestions can change at the discretion of the Scratch Team.

unconstructable13

NanoRook wrote:
unconstructable13 wrote:
even amp agrees this stuff shouldn't be added

sorry that post was rushed and I was scared I was going to be caught naming and shaming somehow

Pepsicola7_

Olimon7661 wrote:
Recently on GitHub there have been some… “interesting” people adding PRs to add paywalled Scratch Membership only features.

Im 90% sure Scratch wont add those features, but only time can tell

Pepsicola7_

Rosics wrote:
I have a feeling this backlash will be worse than the color change in 2023..

mingo-gag wrote:
Ok then how are they going to Justify that $35 Price or $150 for Lifetime

Also Like to bring up the Outsider thing which has more features than the Membership.
Umm, other things OFF of Scratch?

Oh and yeah, Cat Blocks will also be a part of this subscription. So they couldn't bring it back for April Fools but for a MEMBERSHIP?

Cat Blocks an April fools feature, and even still i don't think they will make it members only, you can already use them with a chrome
extension.

Last edited by Pepsicola7_ (Nov. 20, 2025 09:43:49)

Pepsicola7_

I feel like this whole PR thing will start a flame war.

Discuss Scratch