--cherrykitty-- wrote:

xouzouris wrote:

Codingland wrote:

Ko

xouzouris wrote:

Codingland wrote:

101Corp wrote:

both https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/445930662/ and https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/469398386/

No, I men allowing the user to create pic's for their sites

I can make a picture add feature. The only problem is that the image can't have a huge resolution. I'm talking 15*15 pixels.

ok

Also people can draw inappropriate stuff…

But I guess multiplayer drawers are still allowed, so we can do it, without the overly high resolution I tried to store it as.

xouzouris wrote:

--cherrykitty-- wrote:

–snip–

We might also be able to do video but we'll see.

--cherrykitty-- wrote:

xouzouris wrote:

--cherrykitty-- wrote:

–snip–

We might also be able to do video but we'll see.

I think video is possible, but it may be a step or so ahead of ourselves. We are not even sure we are going to do the picture uploading. And to do videos, we will end up with codes as long as the one I used to make the 8K image uploading. Unfortunately, that crashed Scratch…

101Corp wrote:

--cherrykitty-- wrote:

xouzouris wrote:

--cherrykitty-- wrote:

–snip–

We might also be able to do video but we'll see.

I think video is possible, but it may be a step or so ahead of ourselves. We are not even sure we are going to do the picture uploading. And to do videos, we will end up with codes as long as the one I used to make the 8K image uploading. Unfortunately, that crashed Scratch…

I think we will have to hold off from videos. We need to use gifs if you want something like a video. I once tried importing a video converted into a gif, and my web browser froze.

--cherrykitty-- wrote:

xouzouris wrote:

--cherrykitty-- wrote:

–snip–

We might also be able to do video but we'll see.

I think video is possible, but it may be a step or so ahead of ourselves. We are not even sure we are going to do the picture uploading. And to do videos, we will end up with codes as long as the one I used to make the 8K image uploading. Unfortunately, that crashed Scratch…

xouzouris wrote:

I also have another idea:
Instead of storing every single website in a cloud variable (which at some point would fill up), every time the database fills up, a scratchedia member (preferably a programmer) will load the database into their computer and the database would get reset. The space on the programmer's computer where those websites are going to be stored is going to be called: “long-term memory”. And every time someone wants to access a website that has moved on to the long term memory, the one that has the long-term memory will give the requested site to the user. What do you think?

Codingland wrote:

xouzouris wrote:

I also have another idea:
Instead of storing every single website in a cloud variable (which at some point would fill up), every time the database fills up, a scratchedia member (preferably a programmer) will load the database into their computer and the database would get reset. The space on the programmer's computer where those websites are going to be stored is going to be called: “long-term memory”. And every time someone wants to access a website that has moved on to the long term memory, the one that has the long-term memory will give the requested site to the user. What do you think?

ok

Codingland wrote:

xouzouris wrote:

I also have another idea:
Instead of storing every single website in a cloud variable (which at some point would fill up), every time the database fills up, a scratchedia member (preferably a programmer) will load the database into their computer and the database would get reset. The space on the programmer's computer where those websites are going to be stored is going to be called: “long-term memory”. And every time someone wants to access a website that has moved on to the long term memory, the one that has the long-term memory will give the requested site to the user. What do you think?

ok

xMysticalCoder wrote:

Codingland wrote:

xouzouris wrote:

I also have another idea:
Instead of storing every single website in a cloud variable (which at some point would fill up), every time the database fills up, a scratchedia member (preferably a programmer) will load the database into their computer and the database would get reset. The space on the programmer's computer where those websites are going to be stored is going to be called: “long-term memory”. And every time someone wants to access a website that has moved on to the long term memory, the one that has the long-term memory will give the requested site to the user. What do you think?

ok

i dont understand how that would work. how would the users access the long term memory?

xouzouris wrote:

xMysticalCoder wrote:

Codingland wrote:

xouzouris wrote:

I also have another idea:
Instead of storing every single website in a cloud variable (which at some point would fill up), every time the database fills up, a scratchedia member (preferably a programmer) will load the database into their computer and the database would get reset. The space on the programmer's computer where those websites are going to be stored is going to be called: “long-term memory”. And every time someone wants to access a website that has moved on to the long term memory, the one that has the long-term memory will give the requested site to the user. What do you think?

ok

i dont understand how that would work. how would the users access the long term memory?

The users would access the long term memory via an active programmer

xouzouris wrote:

xouzouris wrote:

snip

I want to make it that way because we could store more websites, possibly an infinite amount. And also you can request your website to be brought back to the cloud database and the advantage of that would be that your website would pop up in recents and your site would get more views.

spytime7 wrote:

xouzouris wrote:

xouzouris wrote:

snip

I want to make it that way because we could store more websites, possibly an infinite amount. And also you can request your website to be brought back to the cloud database and the advantage of that would be that your website would pop up in recents and your site would get more views.

But that would mean that one of the programmers would have to be constantly on Scratch processing requests.

101Corp wrote:

spytime7 wrote:

xouzouris wrote:

xouzouris wrote:

snip

I want to make it that way because we could store more websites, possibly an infinite amount. And also you can request your website to be brought back to the cloud database and the advantage of that would be that your website would pop up in recents and your site would get more views.

But that would mean that one of the programmers would have to be constantly on Scratch processing requests.

oh and i saw that meter change from 28 to 29 %

minecraftprox101 wrote:

Name: minecraftprox101
Position:manager and/or head tester
Why I should choose you: I know lots about the internet/websites and I can make a webpage and can do some technical stuff as well.
Why I should trust you: I will never be rude or abuse my ability in any way and I can look through bad signs of stuff and report them whenever I can

Note:Is this project going to have bans because the internet can be dangerous and to ban the acconuts you mentioned if they spam?
(If yes I might be able to make a ban engine)

--cherrykitty-- wrote:

xouzouris wrote:

Codingland wrote:

Ko

xouzouris wrote:

Codingland wrote:

101Corp wrote:

both https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/445930662/ and https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/469398386/

No, I men allowing the user to create pic's for their sites

I can make a picture add feature. The only problem is that the image can't have a huge resolution. I'm talking 15*15 pixels.

ok

Also people can draw inappropriate stuff…

But I guess multiplayer drawers are still allowed, so we can do it, without the overly high resolution I tried to store it as.