SilverEagle wrote:

Hmm, very good solutions! I think my favourite is the capping one, I'd vote about 1000 projects until it caps, and my other is the only allow scratchers. It would really decrease the amount of these studios.

Maybe they set the cap and studios that already over that amount just can't add anymore projects?

I support.

LiquidMetal wrote:

I like your complete post of all the major points. Complete support!

What if New Scratcher's studios were limited to somewhere between 100 and 500 projects?
Add everything studios should definitely be bumped to the bottom of the list for each project's studio list. Trouble is, it starts with “A”…

cc456 wrote:

dude you need a hacker i am here ps i did not whould not hack minecraft i am a good hacker ok ps i hate add every thing studios pss waithing for orders

cc456 wrote:

dude you need a hacker i am here ps i did not whould not hack minecraft i am a good hacker ok ps i hate add every thing studios pss waithing for orders

Failord wrote:

Idea, at least for the project page studio display:

Top priority: Studios owned by the owner of the project.
2nd priority: Studios curated by the owner.
3rd priority: Studios followed by the owner.
4th priority: Studios by Scratchers who the owner of the project is following.
5th priority: Studios by Scratchers who are following the owner of the project.

This order of priorities would help restore relevence to the display on the project page.

oshe10 wrote:

i think this is a great idea! let me know if i can help
We need to stop this!

PhirripSyrrip wrote:

Failord wrote:

Idea, at least for the project page studio display:

Top priority: Studios owned by the owner of the project.
2nd priority: Studios curated by the owner.
3rd priority: Studios followed by the owner.
4th priority: Studios by Scratchers who the owner of the project is following.
5th priority: Studios by Scratchers who are following the owner of the project.

This order of priorities would help restore relevence to the display on the project page.

Interesting. Perhaps there could be some random rotation between the first three, so that more studios get a chance of being shown?

• Ban “add everything” studios- A popular solution among many Scratchers but it does have many problems. I think that it is extremely immoral and would be disheartening to go to someone who has created an “add everything” studio and delete it on the basis that it is “useless”. Alright, you can disguise this by banning it on the basis of “spam”, but think about this: apart from the fact that many “add everything” studios have “add everything” in their name (often capitalised), it would be hard to prove that a studio is in fact an “add everything” studio. Someone could name a studio “Projects” but use it as an “add everything” studio. It would be hard to prove whether the user was in fact creating a banned “add everything” studio or in fact they just found lots and lots of projects really interesting and thought that it deserved being in the studio. Again, the Scratch motto is “Imagine, Program, Share”, so how can you stop people from sharing things that they want? As Paddle2See said, they don't break the Community Guidelines.

• Notify Users when a Project is added to any Studio- I fully support this idea- it's always nice to know when something has happened to any of your projects. You get notifications for love-its, favourites, remixes so why not when it's added to a studio? However, while this would be a nice thing to see added, it doesn't actually solve any of the problems mentioned in point one. Fine, at least you'll know that your project is becoming less and less relevant but there's nothing you can do about it.

• Ask Scratcher's Permission to add their projects to a studio- Again, a nice idea but it does have flaws. What if you're making a studio of “Awesome Games” and you want add projects to it. The problem is, what if you want to add a project of a user who is no longer active? Then you'd be stuck. This idea would create limitations to studios and make them less useful.

You could have an “activity” score for each user, graded just like volcanoes as Active, Dormant or Extinct. If a user is not active, there would be no need to have their permission before you can add their project to a studio. However, this does have drawbacks- what if a user is on camp or on holiday and can't access the internet to accept or deny these requests. By this system, either the projects will be added without the creator knowing, defeating the purpose of asking for permission, or the person who wants to add the projects has to wait a long time for the creator to get back and then the projects will be added. This would disrupt fluency and I can't see how this idea would work. You don't need permission to remix so why do you need permission to add it to a studio?

• Let users remove their own projects from studios- Another popular idea which seems nice at first, but the only problem with this that I can see is that people may start removing all their projects from every studio that they are in which again damages the freedom that studios should have. Again, you can't remove remixes of your project so why should you remove projects from studios?

• Discourage “add everything” studios- The easiest option and least troublesome. The ST could mention somewhere that projects should be put in studios for a reason and that you shouldn't just accept anything. All of you can help to discourage “add everything” studios- merely by replying to this post you're bumping it up for more owners of “add everything” studios to see that lots of people dislike them.

• Hide “add everything” studios from the list of studios that a project is in- And so we come to my favourite solution. Let me explain it:
The idea is that creators of projects can choose which studios to hide from the list of studios that a project is in that appears next to the project. The project will still be in all the “add everything” studios but they won't appear in the list of studios. This means that the list of ten studios contains only studios that the creator has approved of being seen and hides any that just take up space. When you click “view all studios this project is in” you'll see all the studios, including the “add everything” ones. I think that this idea works to best for the creator of the project, the viewers and the owners of “add everything” studios.

• Limit the number of projects in “add everything” studios- while this won't end the problem, it will limit it. By capping it at, say, 500-1,000 projects, I'd say that we are getting rid of all studios except for the useful studios. Any studio that intends to get its projects seen in the way that most studios are meant for should have less than 1,000 projects. Studios that are part of collaborations that make more projects and could overstep the limit could just remove old projects added to the studio. However, Paddle2See suggested a problem this may have here.

• Only allow Scratchers to create Studios- again, this won't end the problem entirely, but if you look at most “add everything” studios, they have been created by New Scratchers seeking fame. This rule would limit those studios while New Scratchers learn of better ways to get fame (such as making good projects, or posting on the forums).

JAVAProgramming wrote:

• Ban “add everything” studios- A popular solution among many Scratchers but it does have many problems. I think that it is extremely immoral and would be disheartening to go to someone who has created an “add everything” studio and delete it on the basis that it is “useless”. Alright, you can disguise this by banning it on the basis of “spam”, but think about this: apart from the fact that many “add everything” studios have “add everything” in their name (often capitalised), it would be hard to prove that a studio is in fact an “add everything” studio. Someone could name a studio “Projects” but use it as an “add everything” studio. It would be hard to prove whether the user was in fact creating a banned “add everything” studio or in fact they just found lots and lots of projects really interesting and thought that it deserved being in the studio. Again, the Scratch motto is “Imagine, Program, Share”, so how can you stop people from sharing things that they want? As Paddle2See said, they don't break the Community Guidelines.

• Notify Users when a Project is added to any Studio- I fully support this idea- it's always nice to know when something has happened to any of your projects. You get notifications for love-its, favourites, remixes so why not when it's added to a studio? However, while this would be a nice thing to see added, it doesn't actually solve any of the problems mentioned in point one. Fine, at least you'll know that your project is becoming less and less relevant but there's nothing you can do about it.

• Ask Scratcher's Permission to add their projects to a studio- Again, a nice idea but it does have flaws. What if you're making a studio of “Awesome Games” and you want add projects to it. The problem is, what if you want to add a project of a user who is no longer active? Then you'd be stuck. This idea would create limitations to studios and make them less useful.

You could have an “activity” score for each user, graded just like volcanoes as Active, Dormant or Extinct. If a user is not active, there would be no need to have their permission before you can add their project to a studio. However, this does have drawbacks- what if a user is on camp or on holiday and can't access the internet to accept or deny these requests. By this system, either the projects will be added without the creator knowing, defeating the purpose of asking for permission, or the person who wants to add the projects has to wait a long time for the creator to get back and then the projects will be added. This would disrupt fluency and I can't see how this idea would work. You don't need permission to remix so why do you need permission to add it to a studio?

• Let users remove their own projects from studios- Another popular idea which seems nice at first, but the only problem with this that I can see is that people may start removing all their projects from every studio that they are in which again damages the freedom that studios should have. Again, you can't remove remixes of your project so why should you remove projects from studios?

• Discourage “add everything” studios- The easiest option and least troublesome. The ST could mention somewhere that projects should be put in studios for a reason and that you shouldn't just accept anything. All of you can help to discourage “add everything” studios- merely by replying to this post you're bumping it up for more owners of “add everything” studios to see that lots of people dislike them.

• Hide “add everything” studios from the list of studios that a project is in- And so we come to my favourite solution. Let me explain it:
The idea is that creators of projects can choose which studios to hide from the list of studios that a project is in that appears next to the project. The project will still be in all the “add everything” studios but they won't appear in the list of studios. This means that the list of ten studios contains only studios that the creator has approved of being seen and hides any that just take up space. When you click “view all studios this project is in” you'll see all the studios, including the “add everything” ones. I think that this idea works to best for the creator of the project, the viewers and the owners of “add everything” studios.

• Limit the number of projects in “add everything” studios- while this won't end the problem, it will limit it. By capping it at, say, 500-1,000 projects, I'd say that we are getting rid of all studios except for the useful studios. Any studio that intends to get its projects seen in the way that most studios are meant for should have less than 1,000 projects. Studios that are part of collaborations that make more projects and could overstep the limit could just remove old projects added to the studio. However, Paddle2See suggested a problem this may have here.

• Only allow Scratchers to create Studios- again, this won't end the problem entirely, but if you look at most “add everything” studios, they have been created by New Scratchers seeking fame. This rule would limit those studios while New Scratchers learn of better ways to get fame (such as making good projects, or posting on the forums).

I think the best solutions are: 2, 3, 5, 6, 7.

I think number 8 is a little unfair, considering a New Scratcher might want to make a “Maze Games” studio, but will not be able to because only Scratchers can make studios.