Hey all - I want to clarify what this topic is to be used for. You are welcome to post here if you have a question about why something was rejected, or you want to ask if something is rejected, or you suspect something might be rejected, or similar things.

This is not the place to try to dispute why something was rejected. By saying something like “This shouldn't be rejected, it would be useful,” it doesn't actually change our minds. Yes, indeed, a lot of these suggestions are useful (you could make the correct claim that “Private messaging would be useful for privately messaging people”) but they are all rejected, so whether or not they would prove to be useful is not really up for debate.

Also, if you're discussing workarounds for a particular rejected suggestion, make sure they actually follow the Community Guidelines. Editing the project.json to hide all scripts in your project is a good way for your project to be removed by the Scratch Team. We want all projects to have all the scripts visible/accessible by everyone; projects which don't do this are reportable and will be removed. I don't endorse Forkphorus or related software, either. Simply put, if you don't want your scripts to be visible by others, then don't share your project on the Scratch website.

And, of course, please snip your posts to avoid unnecessarily long quote-spam. I've removed the recent posts regarding the dispute of a rejected suggestion for the reasons above.

p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p- wrote:

I have something that falls in this category, but doesn't align with the reasoning, so here:
Would restricting sharing for a class count? For example, if I create a school project, but I'm on my school account, and I want to send it to my teacher, but I don't want anybody else to see (It might be something personal, like an apology letter for talking out in class) then I could privately share with my teacher AND ONLY MY TEACHER so that they can see it?

This is an example of a good post for this topic. To answer it: I think it would be somewhat reasonable to have private sharing among classmates/teachers. In a class there is always the concern of a student sharing a project and then another student simply copies their work.

However, my main worry for this is that I gather it's not too difficult to get a Teacher account even if you're not a teacher. Of course, we block Teacher accounts if they're not actually teachers, but by then the damage would already be done — two Scratchers make a Teacher and Student account and use it to privately message each other via projects.

In the case of an apology letter, I would assume an email would suffice.

Za-Chary wrote:

-snipped to shorten message-

p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p- wrote:

I have something that falls in this category, but doesn't align with the reasoning, so here:
Would restricting sharing for a class count? For example, if I create a school project, but I'm on my school account, and I want to send it to my teacher, but I don't want anybody else to see (It might be something personal, like an apology letter for talking out in class) then I could privately share with my teacher AND ONLY MY TEACHER so that they can see it?

This is an example of a good post for this topic. To answer it: I think it would be somewhat reasonable to have private sharing among classmates/teachers. In a class there is always the concern of a student sharing a project and then another student simply copies their work.

However, my main worry for this is that I gather it's not too difficult to get a Teacher account even if you're not a teacher. Of course, we block Teacher accounts if they're not actually teachers, but by then the damage would already be done — two Scratchers make a Teacher and Student account and use it to privately message each other via projects.

Thanks for clearing up the confusion. That is really helpful. Also, congrats on 8500 forum posts!

Za-Chary wrote:

-snip-

I think it would be worth mentioning this in the OP – maybe briefly, or you could quote the post with something along the lines of:

Click here for a description of what kinds of posts are and aren't allowed.

That could help with confusion in the future. We both know it to be true; the post you just made is going to drown down eventually.

Super_Scratch_Bros20 wrote:

Za-Chary wrote:

-snip-

I think it would be worth mentioning this in the OP – maybe briefly, or you could quote the post with something along the lines of:

Click here for a description of what kinds of posts are and aren't allowed.

That could help with confusion in the future. We both know it to be true; the post you just made is going to drown down eventually.

Yes! That is a great idea. There would need to be a few edits, but it should definitely be added. Support!

https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/192297/?page=1#post-4593257 Would this be rejected?
60 second rule

pandacorn_owl wrote:

https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/192297/?page=1#post-4593257 Would this be rejected?
60 second rule

Well, it has been rejected already

(also 60 second rule completed)

spocite wrote:

pandacorn_owl wrote:

https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/192297/?page=1#post-4593257 Would this be rejected?
60 second rule

Well, it has been rejected already

(also 60 second rule completed)

Yes but the rejected topics suggest an explaining why you are reporting/an other option rather than a specific new option. I was wondering if adding a new specific category would be rejected

Yes but the rejected topics suggest an explaining why you are reporting/an other option rather than a specific new option. I was wondering if adding a new specific category would be rejected

m, yes. Just select “username”. While that would be easier, it is rejected
edit: 86th post B) (only my frenz would get that qwq)

btw is this rejected? Or at least part of it?
:0 new pagie

-0Nebula0- wrote:

btw is this rejected? Or at least part of it?
:0 new pagie

not really

Steve0Greatness wrote:

-0Nebula0- wrote:

btw is this rejected? Or at least part of it?
:0 new pagie

not really

ah ok thx

@Za-chary*,
have you picked anyone to be the next owner of the “List of Rejected Suggestions”?
Thanks,
@Steve0Greatness

pandacorn_owl wrote:

https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/192297/?page=1#post-4593257 Would this be rejected?
60 second rule

Adding a specific “impersonation” option is not rejected. I suspect that adding an “other” reason for reporting a user is rejected like others have claimed, but I have not found definitive proof of this.

-0Nebula0- wrote:

btw is this rejected? Or at least part of it?

Nope.

Steve0Greatness wrote:

@Za-chary*,
have you picked anyone to be the next owner of the “List of Rejected Suggestions”?
Thanks,
@Steve0Greatness

I have not. I don't have much of a reason to do so, either, because I plan to maintain this sticky until at least April 2021, probably longer.

Looks like this has been officially rejected by Paddle2See-

DancingNekoGirl wrote:

Looks like this has been officially rejected by Paddle2See-

I was about to come and say that.
Will this be added to the list, or will it just fall under “private messaging”?

sportfan999 wrote:

DancingNekoGirl wrote:

Looks like this has been officially rejected by Paddle2See-

I was about to come and say that.
Will this be added to the list, or will it just fall under “private messaging”?

Private messaging

-0Nebula0- wrote:

sportfan999 wrote:

DancingNekoGirl wrote:

Looks like this has been officially rejected by Paddle2See-

I was about to come and say that.
Will this be added to the list, or will it just fall under “private messaging”?

Private messaging

Thanks for clearing that up I don't usually post on stickies.

IndianRuby718 wrote:

So, about suggestion 9.2, notifications when you get quoted. at the end it says “If you want to stay updated on a certain topic, you can always follow the topic and get notified on new posts that are made.” But this isn't the main reason this suggestion should be implemented.

IndianRuby718 wrote:

If for example someone posts “support” on a topic and leaves, then someone else quotes them and says “please say why you support”, the first person is never going to see that, because they aren't following the discussion.

The person being quoted probably has no reason to follow the topic if they came over for a simple “support” and leaves.

IndianRuby718 wrote:

[M]y example above [snip] is a very good reason for adding it that hasn't been mentioned. Also, [if it only counts direct quoting, and] if you only get one message no matter how many times someone quotes you up until you view the message, like for normal forum posts, then it can't be abused any more than the regular forums can, right? All the extra quoting would take up that whitespace, but there's no use from it, so the spammers would just stop…

But you could still be spammed if someone has quoted you each time you look at your messages. So I'm not asking to remove this from the rejected list, because I see the problems. I just want to see the above addressed in the reasons why it was rejected. [I also have two ideas to replace this suggestion, and I will make two topics about them, but I want to see what happens with this post first.]
If you want to know where I posted this, it's on here… but my post there was very long XD

Can someone address this? [Page 136]

Za-Chary wrote:

Hey all - I want to clarify what this topic is to be used for. You are welcome to post here if you have a question about why something was rejected, or you want to ask if something is rejected, or you suspect something might be rejected, or similar things.

This is not the place to try to dispute why something was rejected. By saying something like “This shouldn't be rejected, it would be useful,” it doesn't actually change our minds.

This probably wasn't meant for my post, but no one's addressed my post yet, so:

IndianRuby718 wrote:

I'm not asking to remove this from the rejected list, because I see the problems. I just want to see the above [read full quote above] addressed in the reasons why it was rejected. [I also have two ideas to replace this suggestion, and I will make two topics about them, but I want to see what happens with this post first.]

[edit: posted the first suggestion]

EEEEEEE   DDDDDD    IIIIIIII  TTTTTTTT           NNN    NN     OOOOO
EE        DD    DD     II        TT     ::       NNNN   NN   OO     OO
EEEEEEE   DD    DD     II        TT              NN NN  NN   OO     OO 
EE        DD    DD     II        TT     ::       NN  NN NN   OO     OO
EE        DD    DD     II        TT              NN   NNNN   OO     OO
EEEEEEE   DDDDDD    IIIIIIII     TT              NN    NNN     OOOOO

< :: extension>
< :: custom-arg>
< :: motion>

IndianRuby718 wrote:

So, about suggestion 9.2, notifications when you get quoted. at the end it says “If you want to stay updated on a certain topic, you can always follow the topic and get notified on new posts that are made.” But this isn't the main reason this suggestion should be implemented.

I never claimed that it was. Regardless, I don't think it's necessary to expand upon the possible uses of this suggestion, since it's rejected anyway.

pandacorn_owl wrote:

spocite wrote:

pandacorn_owl wrote:

https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/192297/?page=1#post-4593257 Would this be rejected?
60 second rule

Well, it has been rejected already

(also 60 second rule completed)

Yes but the rejected topics suggest an explaining why you are reporting/an other option rather than a specific new option. I was wondering if adding a new specific category would be rejected

Oh, yes, sorry. Looking into this, it was rejected in 2014-2015, so the scratch team might've changed their opinion by now