Because of this new update, studios like the LGBTQ+ studio (with its constantly changing title) that have inactive owners have to suffer. People in Scratch Writing Camp (like myself), SRC, and SAC have to suffer. Campers, leaders, and co-leaders freaked out about what this update would mean to the camp, which heavily relies on teamwork with the leaders adding points in the main cabin, and leaders and co-leaders adding words in their cabins. Roleplayers have to start a new thread every 25 replies (which basically is every 12 comments, depending on how long your comments are).

Winter58 wrote:

Why are you limiting managers who can make changes to studios when managers LITERALLY CAN'T DO THAT ANYMORE? All they do is invite and promote now, if I'm correct. What is the point of managers who can't even manage? Many studios rely on additional Scratchers to take responsibility in handling those studios. This can consist of updating descriptions to inform curators of things. But now that's ruined.
People can filter what messages they want. And if they don't want notifs from the studio, they should leave. What's the point of being in a studio if you don't care enough to be active in it?
I think most Scratchers would rather deal with raiders, than with “managers” who can't manage. We can report people who ruin studios, and the ST SHOULD be taking care of things from there. However, that's not how it seems. I've known people who take months to get emails back from the ST. If it's really that hard to manage reports, get more moderators.
If someone wants to join into a conversation, there is literally nothing stopping them. All they have to do is reply.
So many Scratchers are going to leave because of this update. People who RP tend to participate in long conversations (AND NOT ALWAYS JUST BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE). Having to create new conversations is very annoying. People in SWC rely on managers to help it continue running. Cabin leaders add points themselves, but now the sole owner has to manage all the cabin points. Who knows how things will continue there? The SWC community is so friendly, and now, who knows if they'll even be able to continue? I completely forgot to mention how we now have to add people through their username, and no longer can invite followers. I'm going to quote @CosmicKiwi by saying “The famous will get more famous and the underrated will stay underrated.” People with lots of followers can just share a project and get on trending, but underrated people who want to share their projects have to invite their followers username by username. Isn't it great that the “share” portion of Scratch is now completely undermined?

-eIephant wrote:

they changed the reply limit, there goes all the fun roleplays.
they made it so only the studio owner can change the desc. there goes cabin destruction for SWC, there goes manager chats, there goes adding cabin points for SWC. whats the point of managers now?

-vivre wrote:

It's annoying for mobile users. It's hard to do things because everything is so large. You have to scroll past many things to get to stuff and you can see the title as well as a person using say, a laptop. Mobile users experience shouldn't be any less than another's.
Only the owner of the studio can change the description. This is a problem for many, many reasons. First of all, some owners of studios accounts are inactive or have been deleted. I understand that this was done to prevent studio raid like how the new scratcher status was added to prevent spam but this has gone a bit too far. There are studios who need multiple people to update the description like for example SWC this year with over a thousand participants (I'm pretty sure) needs multiple people to update the description to add points. I and many other suggest letting the owner choose who can edit the description and who can't because there is more freedom to that.
Reply limit. There can't be a chain with more than 25 replies and you're going to have to start a new comment. It was put there to keep conversations open to everyone and so loading times are faster. I find the keeping the conversions open to everyone part not a good reason because first of all it might be a private conversion between friends that's nobody's business and it seriously won't stop it. They will most likely just start a new thread and continue their conversation with hopes of no one intruding. We need to respect other people's privacy. For the loading times statement I disagree because barely anyone really care that much. Sure they complained about it but there wasn't that much to complain about. In most cases it was an easy fixable problem that was of slight annoyance.

we love you, st, but in the most polite way, please fix this. listen to us.

Duplicate: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/526621/

Asking to be closed.

thanks for highlighting these! I hope the ST listens to us.

linearlemur wrote:

Duplicate: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/526621/

Asking to be closed.

it's not a duplicate

--starlight wrote:

linearlemur wrote:

Duplicate: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/526621/

Asking to be closed.

it's not a duplicate

If it is not a duplicate of the suggestion to revert the changes - then what is your specific suggestion?

Paddle2See wrote:

--starlight wrote:

linearlemur wrote:

Duplicate: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/526621/

Asking to be closed.

it's not a duplicate

If it is not a duplicate of the suggestion to revert the changes - then what is your specific suggestion?

Well, I think that changing it all back wouldn't benefit us either, because some changes I actually like. The layout isn't too bad, the New Scratchers not being able to create studios and the “Browse Projects” option when adding projects are good too. I think that the manager limit is also good. But the managers not being able to make changes to a studio is really the major one. Perhaps we could have something like a co-owner that you could only have, let's say, 15 of? They could count towards the manager limit.

hey so is it possible that you guys could possibly add a add followers browse followers thing? it would make it AAAAAAAAAAAA LOT! easier especially for the younger people so could you guys do that at some point maybe!? you would get a lot less hate to if you did that it would benefit for everyone!

There are many ways we can improve the new studios, but the ST have to look at a lot of feedback to see what's best. I wouldn't expect them to make any changes just yet.

Support. I do not like the new studio update. My camp I started, Scratch Podcast Camp, needs additional people to run its first session in August. I'm worried this camp I just started can't even have it's first session. WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS, SCRATCH TEAM? I need managers who can manage. I need managers who can change the title, edit the description, change the studio thumbnail. When I realized managers can't manage, I freaked out, because this camp will run on teamwork. When I am busy, I want managers to add announcements and updates. If I am going through a small period of inactivity, I want managers to help out! And, the 40 manager limit is useless when MANAGERS CAN DO NOTHING! I'm part of SWC, and I don't want it to end and my camp I was planning not being able to run because of this HORRIBLE, ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE, STUDIO UPDATE!
Now it is time to address the second part of the update I want to talk about: The new design. I switch my time I spend on Scratch with two devices, a laptop a lot of the time, and a tablet the rest of the time and when I'm on a trip to somewhere. My tablet is where I started scratch. But now, users who use mobile (at least partly) will struggle because of this studio update. Everything is so widespread, and not compact like 2.0 pages. This is how 3.0 pages are. Widespread. I do not want Scratchers on mobile to struggle more than Scratchers on laptop/desktop.
The reply limit. The 25 reply limit means no-good for RP's and TBG's (because RPer's and TBGer's tend to have long conversations with each other, like I'm an RPer and you know how much reply's I've been in a chain with? 100!). Looks like I can't RP anymore on Scratch. Goodbye, RP's on Scratch and hello, TBG forums. I will still participate in studio's but less and not RP's, but if this keeps up, my scratch podcast camp will never exist.

 (φ゜▽゜*♪) :: sensing // This is Laura, my kumquat guard who never sleeps. Sleeping is for amateur Kumquat guards.

Codingfairy07 wrote:

I'm an RPer and you know how much reply's I've been in a chain with? 100!

i used to roleplay, and i think my longest one was 644 or something insane like that xD

--starlight wrote:

Paddle2See wrote:

--starlight wrote:

linearlemur wrote:

Duplicate: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/526621/

Asking to be closed.

it's not a duplicate

If it is not a duplicate of the suggestion to revert the changes - then what is your specific suggestion?

Well, I think that changing it all back wouldn't benefit us either, because some changes I actually like. The layout isn't too bad, the New Scratchers not being able to create studios and the “Browse Projects” option when adding projects are good too. I think that the manager limit is also good. But the managers not being able to make changes to a studio is really the major one. Perhaps we could have something like a co-owner that you could only have, let's say, 15 of? They could count towards the manager limit.

Hmmm. Okay. Could you make a new topic that spells out what changes you would like to see?

Paddle2See wrote:

--starlight wrote:

Paddle2See wrote:

--starlight wrote:

linearlemur wrote:

Duplicate: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/526621/

Asking to be closed.

it's not a duplicate

If it is not a duplicate of the suggestion to revert the changes - then what is your specific suggestion?

Well, I think that changing it all back wouldn't benefit us either, because some changes I actually like. The layout isn't too bad, the New Scratchers not being able to create studios and the “Browse Projects” option when adding projects are good too. I think that the manager limit is also good. But the managers not being able to make changes to a studio is really the major one. Perhaps we could have something like a co-owner that you could only have, let's say, 15 of? They could count towards the manager limit.

Hmmm. Okay. Could you make a new topic that spells out what changes you would like to see?

I don't think we need a new topic, but just edit this topic

 (φ゜▽゜*♪) :: sensing // This is Laura, my kumquat guard who never sleeps. Sleeping is for amateur Kumquat guards.

100% support. 1 0 0 %

Paddle2See wrote:

--starlight wrote:

Paddle2See wrote:

--starlight wrote:

linearlemur wrote:

Duplicate: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/526621/

Asking to be closed.

it's not a duplicate

If it is not a duplicate of the suggestion to revert the changes - then what is your specific suggestion?

Well, I think that changing it all back wouldn't benefit us either, because some changes I actually like. The layout isn't too bad, the New Scratchers not being able to create studios and the “Browse Projects” option when adding projects are good too. I think that the manager limit is also good. But the managers not being able to make changes to a studio is really the major one. Perhaps we could have something like a co-owner that you could only have, let's say, 15 of? They could count towards the manager limit.

Hmmm. Okay. Could you make a new topic that spells out what changes you would like to see?

Of course! Hopefully this better explains it.

--starlight wrote:

Paddle2See wrote:

--starlight wrote:

linearlemur wrote:

Duplicate: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/526621/

Asking to be closed.

it's not a duplicate

If it is not a duplicate of the suggestion to revert the changes - then what is your specific suggestion?

Well, I think that changing it all back wouldn't benefit us either, because some changes I actually like. The layout isn't too bad, the New Scratchers not being able to create studios and the “Browse Projects” option when adding projects are good too. I think that the manager limit is also good. But the managers not being able to make changes to a studio is really the major one. Perhaps we could have something like a co-owner that you could only have, let's say, 15 of? They could count towards the manager limit.

browse projects already existed

ScratchCatHELLO wrote:

browse projects already existed

Better UI and easier to add projects. What's your point with this post??

-Kryptonite- wrote:

ScratchCatHELLO wrote:

browse projects already existed

Better UI and easier to add projects. What's your point with this post??

They’re saying it already existed

They listened to us!:

ScratchCat wrote:

We've read through all your thoughts about this update. We appreciate the folks who have remained constructive and thoughtful with their feedback. This is the most effective way to communicate your concerns with us! We can assure you that we are aware that this is a very significant change in the way that studios work. These changes are designed to address a variety of issues — moving away from an old codebase that is difficult to maintain, improving site performance, addressing suggestions and concerns we have heard from the community, and safety considerations.

We wanted to address a couple common things we’ve seen come up since the update. First, we hear you that the comment limit has made it difficult for text-based roleplayers to have long and drawn out conversations. The original, and current, intention of studios was for them to be a space where Scratchers can comment and collaborate on projects that share a common theme. We are aware that many people have used studios for a variety of purposes other than sharing and collaborating on projects, and that text-based roleplaying is one of those things. That’s always been okay so long as the activities follow the Community Guidelines. However, we can’t make decisions about Scratch features based on how they will impact text-based roleplaying. The changes to comment thread limits are meant to make studios of all themes have conversations involving all members of the studios stay near the top of studios, and that’s unfortunately at odds with the way text-based roleplayers use comment threads.

We hear your concerns about studio manager permissions and what happens if a studio owner is no longer active or interested in the studio they created. We’ve begun working on some ideas to address studio ownership transfers and will share more details about that with you in the future, so stay tuned!

We know that change is difficult, and it can take some time to get used to. Scratch is continuing to grow and we want to make sure it stays around for a long time. These changes were made as a way for us to help ensure Scratch continues to run smoothly, quickly, and safely for everyone who uses it long into the future.

We are going to close the topic but if you have constructive suggestions for future studio updates, please check out the Suggestions Forum to talk through your suggestions with other community members. And if you run into bugs or glitches in studios, please visit the Bugs and Glitches Forum to report them. We’re keeping an eye on these spaces and will continue to take your feedback and suggestions into consideration.

 (φ゜▽゜*♪) :: sensing // This is Laura, my kumquat guard who never sleeps. Sleeping is for amateur Kumquat guards.

Codingfairy07 wrote:

-snip

No; they didn't.

Firstly - the 25 reply limit still exists.
They aren't changing it for neurodivergent and autistic users. you are were an inclusive community; ADHD-affected, Nerodivergent and Autistic users can get sensory overload and it can badly damge their physical or mental health.
that's not even being considerate they're demographics of scratch.

pfft. /srs

It takes forever to invite people. I hate it. The layout is amazing, though!