King no edit

Do you think 3.2 and 4.1 should be merged, since they're almost always suggested together

cheeseisdabest_ wrote:

Why do people keep suggesting here?

Most likely because this topic is the first thing you see in “Suggestions”, and someone who is fairly new to the forums may not know what they're actually supposed to do.

mrsrec wrote:

Edit: To everyone else: Scodex most likely is telling the truth when he says that he used machine translations for "some parts". The post is a combination of machine translation and human translation, and some parts of that post could only have been written by someone with knowledge of Dutch.

Based on this, I think I may leave it up, then? Personally I was waiting to see if you were going to claim to speak Dutch (this would have helped your case), but you don't seem to have stated this anywhere.

There ought to be a better way to bring this sort of stuff to my attention. Maybe I should have just kept profile comments open … But in the future with regards to translated lists, it would be helpful for all parties involved if it everyone communicated what languages they know, what form of translator they used, etc…. I don't need a Google Translate copied-and-pasted ChatGPT Burger King manager cover letter version of the list, but if someone who is fluent in a language translates the list using a healthy mixture of their own knowledge and a machine, using their knowledge of the language to fine-tune it to ensure that those who are fluent can understand it without much awkwardness, then that sounds good enough to me.

ZippyZebraZoom85749 wrote:

King no edit

Do you think 3.2 and 4.1 should be merged, since they're almost always suggested together

I don't think so. 3.2 and 4.1 are already quite long; we don't need an entry that says “Disable remixing or censor minor remixes or disable ‘See Inside’ or private sharing” with a four-paragraph-and-one-sentence-long description.

Just earlier today I saw a suggestion about restricting backpacking but not remixing; so it is clear that some users see the two as separate. 3.2 focuses on remixing while 4.1 focuses on sharing … if that makes sense.

New rejected suggestion? https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/894259/

WPONTA wrote:

(#12004)
New rejected suggestion? https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/894259/

I was about to say that!

WPONTA wrote:

(#12004)
New rejected suggestion? https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/894259/

Maybe simply adding a note about it to the original “Forever if” section is best. Saves a whole section about something thats almost the same as another!

A rejected suggestion was a voice recording extension, I was very tired to make Python Blocks, so I'll show you different blocks:

record:: extension

set mode to [speech-to-text v]:: extension

set voice pitch to [0]:: extension

when voice pitch is [10]:: hat extension

voice pitch :: reporter extension

recorded? :: boolean extension

stop recording :: cap extension

More blocks come soon…
I may share this to the Scratch Team, I guess so.

Davyd_The_Owl wrote:

A rejected suggestion was a voice recording extension, I was very tired to make Python Blocks, so I'll show you different blocks:

set mode to [speech-to-text v]:: extension

More blocks come soon…
I may share this to the Scratch Team, I guess so.

The speech-to-text isn't rejected, it's in the talks right now according to an image from the ngp topic (scroll to the middle image):

sup3r_r0ck wrote:

You might wanna add an ai assistant as rejected

That will be suggested a lot, but the link must be one of an forum post.

ScodexPerson wrote:

sup3r_r0ck wrote:

You might wanna add an ai assistant as rejected

That will be suggested a lot, but the link must be one of a forum post.

When image generation was on the list the link was an article.

sup3r_r0ck wrote:

ScodexPerson wrote:

sup3r_r0ck wrote:

You might wanna add an ai assistant as rejected

That will be suggested a lot, but the link must be one of a forum post.

When image generation was on the list the link was an article.

Oh, i misunderstood.

Sorry, you have to wait 60 seconds between posts.

ScodexPerson wrote:

sup3r_r0ck wrote:

You might wanna add an ai assistant as rejected

That will be suggested a lot, but the link must be one of an forum post.

There is no such rule to my knowledge, but there is a concern that comments will not load if they get buried deep enough, so if this gets added to the list, a screenshot of it should be included.

But is that comment really a rejection, or just a statement that the CLA fell trough?

Catscratcher07 wrote:

ScodexPerson wrote:

sup3r_r0ck wrote:

You might wanna add an ai assistant as rejected

That will be suggested a lot, but the link must be one of an forum post.

There is no such rule to my knowledge, but there is a concern that comments will not load if they get buried deep enough, so if this gets added to the list, a screenshot of it should be included.

But is that comment really a rejection, or just a statement that the CLA fell trough?

The comment just mentioned it wasn't the right solution, it didn't say it was rejected.

ScodexPerson wrote:

(#12010)

sup3r_r0ck wrote:

You might wanna add an ai assistant as rejected

That will be suggested a lot, but the link must be one of an forum post.

Then they could do the very first suggestion that suggests that or the most popular one

The Scratch Team has allowed username changes only on very rare occasions, such as if the username contains personal information or causes gender dysphoria.

ok i tried this with another one of my accounts, and it did not work.