Hey Scratch Team and anyone else who might read this. :wave:

This suggestion may come off as passive aggressive in places because I am not the best with tone. That is not the case. This is a post about why this update needs to be redrawn and how you can improve for the future.

I'm going to start with main reason I came to this forum for the first time, being the recent studio update.

I don't necessarily agree with any of it. There are some moves that don't apply to me (as someone who hasn't been a new scratcher) while others will affect how I interact with the scratch community.

I am a “New Scratcher” - how do I create a studio?
To create a studio you will need to have “Scratcher” status. See here to learn more about what this means.

I don't have many issues with this if I am honest. I don't think the change was necessary per say. I don't think it's dreadful because scratcher is an easily attainable role you can earn within two weeks.

I am a manager - why can’t I edit studio descriptions?
Only studio owners have the ability to edit studio descriptions. Over the years, we have heard from many of you that allowing managers to make major changes to studios has made it harder to manage and run a successful studio. This change is intended to give studio owners more creative control over their spaces.

See this is the change I have the largest issue with.

You (as the ST) keep repeating the point here that 'over the years we have heard from many of you that allowing managers to make major changes to studios has made it harder to manage and run a successful studio' This is in your ‘what if the owner is inactive’ section, in the original thread as well in the one above.

So, here is my simple rebuttal. Majority rules. MOST studios will not be raided. MOST scratchers had no issues with several users editing the studio. I would wager MOST ACTIVE studio's relied on having several scratchers editing that studio.
No news, is good news As someone relatively active in the studio scene, people I have worked with in creating these spaces, have had no issues with having several managers. I can assure you, that you have more scratchers asking for change now, then you did over the years

I'm also going to lay out the pro's and the con's of this update from a scratcher who has already been affected by this updates perspective.

Pro's

• Raids will no longer be able to affect studio's descriptions (number of managers, thumbnail etc… can still be edited)
  

• the owner will have control over the description
  

Cons!

• One person (who according to scratch statistics, is most likely to be 12!) must be active enough to edit a studio description when needed. This could be weekly, monthly, daily or hourly. Featured studios, scratch camps and large online community's (PoP for example!) Will ride on the back of one person. who is most likely to be 12
  

• Studios were the owner goes inactive must be reset to allow for updates to the description
  

• Raids still can't be fully stopped.
  

• It makes the role of manager useless! Most thumbnails are not changed often
  

I want other managers to edit the description, what do I do?
Over the years, we have heard from many of you that allowing managers to make major changes to studios has made it harder to manage and run a successful studio. As a way to address this, studio owners will now be the only people allowed to edit studio descriptions, titles, and thumbnails, which will prevent others from changing or destroying the work you have done in your studios,such as managers defacing the studio description or using it as a space for chatting.

This avoids the question scratch. The community right now doesn't care about why you've already told us why in the original explanation. What we want to know is how do we adapt to this. The fact you cannot provide us with an answer leaves one answer: This was not something you had thought about. That is a fundamental flaw and your answer to the question of how do we work around this a nice way of saying: Just get over it.

Why is there a limit on the number of managers to a studio?
This change is intended to address a few issues: it will reduce the number of spammy studios, encourage studio owners and managers to be more intentional when promoting curators, and further limit the amount of people who can make major changes to studios.

What major changes scratch? The thumbnail? Maybe the title? Why do we need to be more intentional? Younger kids still won't think ‘is this one of the 40 managers I want’ when they promote people. Older kids/teens will continue to think about who they promote. If they see a need for over 40 managers? They are right in that choice. You said it yourself. This is their space. Why are you trying to limit what they can do with their space.

This isn't going to stop the spam studios. The only type you've stopped is the let's get 100+ managers. Their is no curator limit. Spam studios like this will always exist. You're tackling one branch of this issue. Not the roots. If you plan on stopping spam studios can I suggest:

• Making it clear what counts as a spam studio in the community guidelines
  

• Allowing studios to be reported for being a spam studio? if this isn't already inputted
  

Why is there a limit on the number of replies in a comment thread?
Limiting comment threads helps enhance site performance, and prevents long but still active threads from being buried where few people will see new activity. As Scratch continues to grow, it is important to us to continue exploring ways in which we can help keep Scratch running smoothly, safely, and quickly for everyone who uses it. It is our hope that these changes will help do just that! Once a comment thread has reached its limit, you are welcome to start a new thread to continue the conversation.

This topic is filled with roleplayers discussing the issues they have seen with this update.

From an ex-Roleplayer. This will kill roleplayers.

However, I am no longer active in that community and have never had a thread larger than 25 messages out of it. I recommend you check that out if you have not yet. It's filled with both sides of the arguement.

Onto the layout.

It's very bright and saturated, which can be distracting and/or overwhelming. Using a rough estimate of the studio colours on contrastchecker shows that it doesn't pass as a neurodivergent friendly colour scheme. The issue is the light blue. It passed when it was white.

The new layout of title, description and buttons are also not neurodivergent friendly. It's very squashed in my opinion which leads to it looking clustered and it's confusing to navigate after being used the to old layout where it was more spaced out. I find a way around this is too zoom out

Of course, I have zoomed out to 80% which works as less overwhelming for me (I am likely autistic but not yet diagnosed.). There are websites you can look up for all this information.

As for what the ST could do? I think the first step would be too change the pale blue back to white for that contrast.

Of course. It's important to understand this is all in theory and it may be I am one person who struggles with this. It's important that if you are ND, feel free to share. Respect that we all experience neurodivergence differently and because you are not struggling does not mean others are not.

I will add your opinions here because YOU need to have a say.

So! Let's talk about HOW this can be avoided for the future (because if it isn't clear. I am against this update)

First off: Announce to the community before these updates go live.

Communication is key here. When making major updates which change major aspects of scratch, consult the community. I have not seen many people in agreement of the aspect of this. This whole update could have been avoided had the scratch community knew.

This means making news such as this easily accessible. Perhaps, add a banner (like you did when announcing 3.0) in areas that are being changed to alert scratchers beforehand. A minimum of 24 hours however I think a week would be the best time to let scratchers think the update settle and decide if they like it.

Second of all:
Ask yourself:

• Who will this update affect
  

• What positives AND negatives will this update bring
  

• When does this update need to be implemented
  

• Where will this update affect.
  

• Why are we adding this update.
  

Then rethink the update. come up with ways to fix the cons.

Third of all:
Listen to scratcher input.

Fourth:
Understand who is on scratch.

A majority of new scratchers are aged 11-13


Your not appealing to 8 year olds. If you want to draw in 11-13 year olds, you want to give us things to work with. We are creative and we like things to fiddle with. It the age they start learning responsibility and will want experience in being a studio manager. It's when they'll want to roleplay.

Scratchers like studio comments


It'll be something to keep track of how the stats change with the studio update. If they have a significant drop (which I predict they will ^^ due to RP's being inaccessible)

Thank you for reading till the end. This is a suggestion and my thoughts on the new update. Feel free to add on.

+1

Managers can still remove other managers, so even if they can't edit the description or thumbnail they can still raid and completely disassemble a studio.

+100, you are very right

very well written and constructive +1

Agreed. I believe it really complicates how some groups and camps are run (take SWC as an example; only managers can modify the description now!). This limits what the groups can do in general and turns the Manager status into something practically useless, putting all the responsibility on the Creator's shoulders. To be frank, there's barely any difference between the Manager and Curator status anymore.

Wow. It’s is incredibly well written and much better than I could’ve done.

Imacreamoo wrote:

First off: Announce to the community before these updates go live.

Communication is key here. When making major updates which change major aspects of scratch, consult the community. I have not seen many people in agreement of the aspect of this. This whole update could have been avoided had the scratch community knew.

This means making news such as this easily accessible. Perhaps, add a banner (like you did when announcing 3.0) in areas that are being changed to alert scratchers beforehand. A minimum of 24 hours however I think a week would be the best time to let scratchers think the update settle and decide if they like it.

Second of all:
Ask yourself:

• Who will this update affect
  

• What positives AND negatives will this update bring
  

• When does this update need to be implemented
  

• Where will this update affect.
  

• Why are we adding this update.
  

Then rethink the update. come up with ways to fix the cons.

Third of all:
Listen to scratcher input.

Fourth:
Understand who is on scratch.

It’s crazy how the ST didn’t even consider any of this. I mean, it’s basic! When you’re thinking of releasing a major update, you must consider these things! How did they skip over it?! +1

The scratch team really needs to rethink this update. Support.

Imacreamoo wrote:

-snip-

Beautiful.

+1.
This is Game Theory kind of thinking and explaining. A point to be made: If a manager/s is raiding your studio, get this, DEMOTE THEM!

I think you should be more specific than “think of ways to fix the cons”.

Imacreamoo wrote:

current support = 8. Please let me know if you agree. The more voices the better :)

Hey Scratch Team and anyone else who might read this. :wave:

This suggestion may come off as passive aggressive in places because I am not the best with tone. That is not the case. This is a post about why this update needs to be redrawn and how you can improve for the future.

I agree wholeheartedly with all this! SWC is pretty much one of my only reasons for staying on Scratch, and the ST's new updates are really discouraging everyone from staying on the website. I'd be fine with these updates if the ST at least made them optional.

CherriCookie wrote:

Imacreamoo wrote:

Quote snip

I agree wholeheartedly with all this! SWC is pretty much one of my only reasons for staying on Scratch, and the ST's new updates are really discouraging everyone from staying on the website. I'd be fine with these updates if the ST at least made them optional.

Please don't quote the whole post…

support. also I made a topic with some of this type of posts compiled and I quoted your post. here it is if you want to check it out.

i 100% agree with this and you have my support.
this is the kind of point i was making in a different forum (although mine came off as sort of aggressive and i whole-heartedly admit that it was)
they need to think before releasing an update that will change a massive part of the website.
as well, i do agree that some things they said came off sort of toxic, in a “Get over it” kind of way. and from the scratch team? it sets a bad example of what a moderation team is like.
and, the issues that they said this update would fix aren't fixed. not in any way. just like you said.
even the reply limit one.

ScratchCat wrote:

…prevents long but still active threads from being buried where few people will see new activity.

the limit doesn't even prevent that ^. if anything, it actually makes it worse. the replies kept threads intact and together, and it stayed under the comment with a little “see more” drop down if there were more than 6 replies.
with the new limit, we're forced to separate stuff into separate threads, actually causing the issue you meant to avoid.

overall, you've made a wonderful point and you 100% have my support! +1
10/10 suggestion

You have my 100% support on this! I'm mostly on Scratch for a few Danganronpa RPs, that's it. Without that, I would probably end up leaving, and I don't have any other place to roleplay.

yes +1

Well said +1

Guys please provide why you're supporting, you've got to be constructive.

Anyways no support because, it did solve most of the raiding problems, it may not fix it 100% but at least 70%. And the limit of 25 comments is to increase loading time, it's better if you ask me. I'd add more on but I have limited time and cannot spend time saying every reason in your long post xP

+1. This is amazingly well-written and provides ways for the ST to fix these. I am a manager of PoP and this has wrecked us. Thank you very much for writing this.

-Kryptonite- wrote:

Guys please provide why you're supporting, you've got to be constructive.

Anyways no support because, it did solve most of the raiding problems, it may not fix it 100% but at least 70%. And the limit of 25 comments is to increase loading time, it's better if you ask me. I'd add more on but I have limited time and cannot spend time saying every reason in your long post xP

but when they fixed the RAIDING problems, they created more problems with people who didn't even get raided in the first place.