Right now, almost 60% of everybody that has never known about the forums before believes that mass reporting/ false reporting exists and every report is the fault of a mass reporter, even though it may or may not be true.

Even when the proof exists right in plain sight, not many actually see the proof

However, I believe the Scratch Team should stand up for themselves and make an article in the Scratch News (the only place where this info is readily available to scratchers on the main site) so that the popularity of this so-called “myth” reduces.

The_Blue_J wrote:

Right now, almost 60% of everybody that has never known about the forums before believes that mass reporting exists and every report is the fault of a mass reporter, even though it may or may not be true.

Do you have a source for this?

The_Blue_J wrote:

However, I believe the Scratch Team should stand up for themselves and make an article in the Scratch News (the only place where this info is readily available to non-forumers) so that the popularity of this so-called “myth” reduces.

How likely are most users to actually read through this article?

jvvg wrote:

The_Blue_J wrote:

Right now, almost 60% of everybody that has never known about the forums before believes that mass reporting exists and every report is the fault of a mass reporter, even though it may or may not be true.

Do you have a source for this?

There's no single source, it's everywhere, and there's no official measurement for this… That's why I placed an approximate number.

However, here's a good source. Many famous scratchers have made projects saying that they were mass reported, and, just like a virus, it spreads to their greatest fans and whoever checks their project

The_Blue_J wrote:

However, I believe the Scratch Team should stand up for themselves and make an article in the Scratch News (the only place where this info is readily available to non-forumers) so that the popularity of this so-called “myth” reduces.

How likely are most users to actually read through this article?

A lot of users read the Scratch News, as proven by topics in the Announcements forum gaining lots of popularity

This depends on your definition of “mass reporting.”

It is true that projects get automatically taken down if enough users report them. In many cases this is what I see as the definition of “mass reported”; it just means that the project was automatically removed because enough users reported it. In this case, I don't see the purpose in the Scratch Team making an announcement just to say “Yes, this feature exists.”

So I think you'll need to clarify what specifically the Scratch Team needs to make an announcement on.

Za-Chary wrote:

This depends on your definition of “mass reporting.”

It is true that projects get automatically taken down if enough users report them. In many cases this is what I see as the definition of “mass reported”; it just means that the project was automatically removed because enough users reported it. In this case, I don't see the purpose in the Scratch Team making an announcement just to say “Yes, this feature exists.”

So I think you'll need to clarify what specifically the Scratch Team needs to make an announcement on.

As I said…

Right now, almost 60% of everybody that has never known about the forums before believes that mass reporting exists and every report is the fault of a mass reporter, even though it may or may not be true.

So since mass reporting is an unconfirmed statement that a lot of scratchers believe in, I think the ST will try to publish an article defending their name with credible proof.

The_Blue_J wrote:

As I said…

Right now, almost 60% of everybody that has never known about the forums before believes that mass reporting exists and every report is the fault of a mass reporter, even though it may or may not be true.

So since mass reporting is an unconfirmed statement that a lot of scratchers believe in, I think the ST will try to publish an article defending their name with credible proof.

That doesn't really clarify. “Mass reporting” exists (with the definition “projects getting automatically censored because of being reported too many times”) — the Scratch Team has already publicly stated this (albeit not in an announcement) and Scratchers have already experienced it. In that sense, “mass reporting” is not “unconfirmed,” as you say. So what exactly do you want the Scratch Team to say in such an announcement?

Za-Chary wrote:

The_Blue_J wrote:

As I said…

Right now, almost 60% of everybody that has never known about the forums before believes that mass reporting exists and every report is the fault of a mass reporter, even though it may or may not be true.

So since mass reporting is an unconfirmed statement that a lot of scratchers believe in, I think the ST will try to publish an article defending their name with credible proof.

the Scratch Team has already publicly stated this

{source?}

In that sense, “mass reporting” is not “unconfirmed,”

It is unconfirmed because right now, there's no readily available official reply.

The_Blue_J wrote:

Za-Chary wrote:

the Scratch Team has already publicly stated this

{source?}

In that sense, “mass reporting” is not “unconfirmed,”

It is unconfirmed because right now, there's no readily available official reply.

The source is me. I have stated this, both as a Scratcher and a Scratch Team member. I can give you a link if you want one, but for now, check entry 3.5 in the list of rejected suggestions: it is rejected to remove the “mass reporting” system, so therefore it currently exists.

Za-Chary wrote:

The source is me. I have stated this, both as a Scratcher and a Scratch Team member. I can give you a link if you want one, but for now, check entry 3.5 in the list of rejected suggestions: it is rejected to remove the “mass reporting” system, so therefore it currently exists.

Most scratchers on the main site have no idea of TOLORS, or even the forums. Even when the proof that mass reporting doesn't exist is found in plain sight, not many see the proof.

The_Blue_J wrote:

Za-Chary wrote:

The source is me. I have stated this, both as a Scratcher and a Scratch Team member. I can give you a link if you want one, but for now, check entry 3.5 in the list of rejected suggestions: it is rejected to remove the “mass reporting” system, so therefore it currently exists.

Most scratchers on the main site have no idea of TOLORS, or even the forums. Even when the proof that mass reporting doesn't exist is found in plain sight, not many see the proof.

Wha — “mass reporting” does exist. Any “proof” that one can come up with that “mass reporting” doesn't exist is simply not true. Either you are not understanding what I am saying, or I am not understanding your suggestion.

(Again, as usual, the definition of “mass reporting” I am using is “projects getting automatically censored because of being reported too many times.” It is well-documented that this feature exists; see for example this Scratch Wiki article which cites this Scratch Team member's post. If you are using a different definition of “mass reporting,” let me know.)

The_Blue_J wrote:

Za-Chary wrote:

The source is me. I have stated this, both as a Scratcher and a Scratch Team member. I can give you a link if you want one, but for now, check entry 3.5 in the list of rejected suggestions: it is rejected to remove the “mass reporting” system, so therefore it currently exists.

Most scratchers on the main site have no idea of TOLORS, or even the forums. Even when the proof that mass reporting doesn't exist is found in plain sight, not many see the proof.

I am assuming that you are mixing up mass reporting with false reporting. Not all cases of “mass reporting” are false reporting. And anyway, false reporting still exists, it is just very overblown.

ThisIsTemp1 wrote:

it is just very overblown.

And that's why the Scratch Team needs to clear their name.

The_Blue_J wrote:

ThisIsTemp1 wrote:

it is just very overblown.

And that's why the Scratch Team needs to clear their name.

Change mass reporting to false reporting then, and the suggestion will make a bit more sense.

Both of them are basically the same, however, mass reporting is used more in common parlance, even though it is just false reporting with lots of unknown scratchers, as opposed to one or two scratchers

The_Blue_J wrote:

Both of them are basically the same

No they are not. “False reporting” does not necessarily cause “mass reporting.” Conversely, “mass reporting” can happen regardless of whether or not “false reporting” took place.

Za-Chary wrote:

The_Blue_J wrote:

Both of them are basically the same

No they are not. “False reporting” does not necessarily cause “mass reporting.” Conversely, “mass reporting” can happen regardless of whether or not “false reporting” took place.

I see, in which case, scratch should explain their stance against both.

The_Blue_J wrote:

Za-Chary wrote:

The_Blue_J wrote:

Both of them are basically the same

No they are not. “False reporting” does not necessarily cause “mass reporting.” Conversely, “mass reporting” can happen regardless of whether or not “false reporting” took place.

I see, in which case, scratch should explain their stance against both.

Only false reporting as mass reporting can actually be good in some cases.

ThisIsTemp1 wrote:

snip

Maybe, maybe not

The_Blue_J wrote:

I see, in which case, scratch should explain their stance against both.

What is there to explain?

Za-Chary wrote:

The_Blue_J wrote:

I see, in which case, scratch should explain their stance against both.

What is there to explain?

The summary of what I want the ST to explain, and why, can be found in the OP.