when green flag clicked

forever
stop it stop it stop it stop it stop it stop it
end

KrysztofITGUY wrote:

no i get forum messages from this stopppppppppppppppppppppp

when green flag clicked

forever
stop it stop it stop it stop it stop it stop it
end

Za-Chary wrote:

MythosLore wrote:

Za-Chary wrote:

Nice. Could anyone find some other examples of banning VPNs being suggested? I am considering adding it to the list.

I provided several links in this post back in September.

Thanks. I think it's about time to add it to the list now. Maybe we can re-evaluate in the future if we change our mind, but for now maybe it will be helpful. See 8.11.

BionicBoy554 wrote:

Luancreator wrote:

you are not staff

If I recall, he used to be
(Future me here, he was, in fact, a scratch team member. Also, you don't have to be a staff to own a sticky.)

In particular, I was only a Scratcher when I started maintaining this sticky!

the_awsome_penguinja wrote:

removing advanced topics has been rejected

Thanks. I'm not sure that it's suggested often — and perhaps the suggestion itself is misguided, since Advanced Topics is not an “off-topic” forum — so I'll leave it off the list for now.

-Rodri wrote:

Since I have no life (can i get a womp womp?), I went through some pages and found all the recent rejections:

Monthly Progress Reports from ST
Banning Generic Platformers
A rating system for Scratch projects
A Scratch movie with eight sequels
Celebrate “Important” holidays (but this was rejected because it's hard to decide what counts as “important”
A celebration on Scratch for Cupman and Mugman fighting evil
A rating system for Scratch projects (part 2!11)
Taking severe security measure to prevent ban evaders

rodri

Thanks for the update.

• “Monthly progress reports from the Scratch Team” doesn't actually appear to be rejected, as @Paddle2See does not state nor explain why it would rejected. It's possible that the thread was closed due to the implication that the Scratch Team is “lazy.”
  
  
• For “Banning generic platformers,” see below.
  
  
• I cannot access “A rating system for Scratch projects.”
  
  
• This particular “Scratch movie” thread reads like a joke suggestion.
  
  
• “Celebrate national days” reads like an ill-defined suggestion since not even the OP knew what “national days” were supposed to mean.
  
  
• “Cuphead” reads like a joke suggestion.
  
  
• “Age rating system” is already rejected, and listed as 7.2.
  
  
• This particular “Zero tolerance policy for ban evaders” thread reads like a joke suggestion.
  

MountY_Backup wrote:

Can you please add “Completely Ban Generic Platformers” to The Official List of Rejected Suggestions. "There had been multiple suggestions suggesting that generic platformers should be banned and Scratch team said that they are not going to ban all of them.

What is a generic platformer:
A generic platformer is a platformer where the character (usually a one-eye cube) simply avoids spikes, pits, lava, and there is usually something bouncy (like trampolines.)

I don't think I can add this to the list as-is because the definition of “generic platformer” is subjective.

(Link to future reference: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/post/7938244/ )

MythosLore wrote:

For 3D Scratch, there used to be a block “go to x y z” but it was censored. I think that there still should be a block on that quote, though, for consistency with the rest of section 1. Would this block work?

set z position to () :: motion 

I don't think it got censored; I feel like I removed it just because it seemed … silly (?) … to have a block there. 3D Scratch refers to more than just a “go to (x,y,z)” position block.

starlightsparker wrote:

how did this load in 2 seconds rn

Xzillox wrote:

starlightsparker wrote:

how did this load in 2 seconds rn

bro is running an industrial military grade supercomputer

starlightsparker wrote:

Xzillox wrote:

starlightsparker wrote:

how did this load in 2 seconds rn

bro is running an industrial military grade supercomputer

on an iPad 9th gen no idea how it loaded so fast but it also loaded fast rn what the what

starlightsparker wrote:

on an iPad 9th gen no idea how it loaded so fast but it also loaded fast rn what the what

starlightsparker wrote:

how did this load in 2 seconds rn

when green flag clicked
forever
create
collaborate
play
end
define create
jjj
define collaborate
jjj
define play
jjj

Jeff_Siu wrote:

<snip>

XCartooonX wrote:

Shutting down the Scratch Forums was rejected

medians wrote:

XCartooonX wrote:

Shutting down the Scratch Forums was rejected

Is that often suggested though?

RethinkingVoxels wrote:

Removing the fishbowl sprite got rejected

plantskym2 wrote:

I wasn't sure, do you add solution posts like after the rejection reason like, "However, a possible solution for this rejection can be discussed here."

MythosLore wrote:

plantskym2 wrote:

I wasn't sure, do you add solution posts like after the rejection reason like, "However, a possible solution for this rejection can be discussed here."

Yes, for instance, there is one on 6.5.

mumu245 wrote:

Za-Chary wrote:

(#8437)
I cannot access “A rating system for Scratch projects.”

Could still add it to dislikes.

mumu245 wrote:

Za-Chary wrote:

(#8437)
I don't think I can add this to the list as-is because the definition of “generic platformer” is subjective.

Maybe extend censoring projects without coding to censoring any type of project?

Contraery wrote:

The source topic of 6.5 appears to have been dustbinned.

I can't find a new one myself so I thought i'd tell instead

medians wrote:

XCartooonX wrote:

Shutting down the Scratch Forums was rejected

Is that often suggested though?

RethinkingVoxels wrote:

Removing the fishbowl sprite got rejected

plantskym2 wrote:

Ah okay, didn't catch that. Then do you think Za-Chary would add my solution for 5.2?

Za-Chary wrote:

Thoughts on removing entry 6.5? I will probably remove it from the list next week unless there is a good reason not to do so.

cheddargirl wrote:

That said: just because those words are not currently blocked outright doesn't mean you won't get in trouble for using them - use them one too many times in a short time period and you can end up getting a notification for language. Or use them in certain places (like a profile description or avatar or forum signature) and they're likely to be removed once reported. So removing them from the forum filter won't really make sense in the interim.

Za-Chary wrote:

I'd like confirmation from a Scratch Team member that this is not rejected. It still seems like a way to send lots of invites in a short amount of time, which doesn't really solve the problem of “It was too easy for one person to generate very large numbers of invites.”