Zelnady wrote:

Yeah, I had to close my shop because of the image ban

Same

KING NO EDIT

Scratch--TheCat wrote:

Support. I'd like to use Scratch as an image host in school without having to wait unitl I get home to upload the pictures I want to post on Cubeupload [it's blocked on my school computer]

Wow, does your school even care? Edit: That's a joke. Why would they block their own image thing? There couldn't be a filter, but that's the same for projects. Are we removing projects now?

<0-0::sensing>//This is Charles; he protects my signature from evil kumquats.
when I'm spawned::events hat//This is the code Charles' brain runs on.
forever
if <[100] > (distance to [an evil kumquat v])> then
delete the evil kumquat::control
end
end

glitcX wrote:

k7e wrote:

This still may be rejected.

Za-Chary wrote:

9.5 Allow files to be uploaded into forum posts
The Scratch Team would have to pay for storage of these files, and they only have a limited amount of resources to do so. Storage space would be better allocated toward Scratch projects, anyway. There is also the issue of someone uploading a file that can potentially cause harm to someone's computer. Searching through these files would require significantly more moderation work, and there are not enough moderators able to do the job at the moment.

Remember, something doesn't count as rejected if you add a solution.

Doesn't help if the solution itself is rejected, which it is.

And, let's all agree with this. Using Scratch's own assets to host images for the forums is quite a hack. Think about it; when does Scratch uses Assets normally? Only when using projects, and that's only for images and audio. Sure, people figured out you can put ZIP files in there (and text files, though that's been patched), but those “features” are most likely vestigial, and is otherwise unintended.

This is what I've seen a lot on Scratch lately. People adore about a “feature” that is unintended, but is otherwise in common use because they frequently use it because of its benefits, to the point that they made tools to aid it. When they fixed the “feature”, everyone went out of their minds and protested to bring it back, ignoring the fact that their “feature” isn't supposed to be used at all. They even took it as far as declaring the Scratch Team do not care about their community, while really they're just being egoistical, focusing more on the what rather than the why from the Scratch Team's actions.

You might think "oh, it's not worth the ST time, why take the Forums down for a week for something everyone uses?“ Again, focus on why the ST did this. They updated the filter (which is a blessing and a curse), and from it they blocked any mentions of ”the assets link". Is it pointless on this context? Probably. Would I be mad if they did it? Not at all.

(Very late update: It seems like the forums were down because someone abused the then broken filter and made topics with swear words on them.)

So, what's my solution? Honestly, I can't see any. Adding another image host still doesn't fix the problem that some people still can't properly see the image (most likely because the site might be blocked). I guess instead of censoring “get_image” (which I think is on the filter) (turns out it's not, so I guess both the cdn2 and assets link are in the filter), we should've perhaps censor “assets.scratch.mit.edu”, so we can still use the cdn2 link to host the images. This is still far from perfect (and I think using project thumbnails to show images is still unintended), but it's still better than what we had now.

I still think it was an accident, they didn’t intentionally remove it and it was only done because the main site censors it.

gilbert_given_189 wrote:

I guess instead of censoring “get-image” (which I think is on the filter), we should've perhaps censor “assets.scratch.mit.edu”, so we can still use the cdn2 link to host the images.

Why use cdn2 over assets?

I personally think Scratch needs to choose more image hosts. This might already be rejected, or even implemented, but I think in addition to whatever they pick, we should be able to use GitHub for images as well.

[small]non-member post, take whatever I say with a hint of salt and remember there's no authority behind it[/small]

kkidslogin wrote:

gilbert_given_189 wrote:

I guess instead of censoring “get-image” (which I think is on the filter), we should've perhaps censor “assets.scratch.mit.edu”, so we can still use the cdn2 link to host the images.

Why use cdn2 over assets?

Mostly since it's used for thumbnails, including project thumbnails.
Using “uploads.scratch.mit.edu” would be better, but that's not in the image host whitelist.

kkidslogin wrote:

I personally think Scratch needs to choose more image hosts. This might already be rejected, or even implemented, but I think in addition to whatever they pick, we should be able to use GitHub for images as well.

gilbert_given_189 wrote:

Adding another image host still doesn't fix the problem that some people may still can't properly see the image (most likely because the site might be blocked).

gilbert_given_189 wrote:

I guess instead of censoring “get-image” (which I think is on the filter), we should've perhaps censor “assets.scratch.mit.edu”, so we can still use the cdn2 link to host the images.

Wait lemme check
get_image

gilbert_given_189 wrote:

(#26)

kkidslogin wrote:

gilbert_given_189 wrote:

I guess instead of censoring “get-image” (which I think is on the filter), we should've perhaps censor “assets.scratch.mit.edu”, so we can still use the cdn2 link to host the images.

Why use cdn2 over assets?

Mostly since it's used for thumbnails, including project thumbnails.
Using “uploads.scratch.mit.edu” would be better, but that's not in the image host whitelist.

kkidslogin wrote:

I personally think Scratch needs to choose more image hosts. This might already be rejected, or even implemented, but I think in addition to whatever they pick, we should be able to use GitHub for images as well.

gilbert_given_189 wrote:

Adding another image host still doesn't fix the problem that some people may still can't properly see the image (most likely because the site might be blocked).

True.

I personally am unsure about CDN because of CDN's even worse size limitations AFAIK- personally, I think using CDN as-is would be even more hacky than assets.

Now uploads? That sounds like a much better idea.

[small]non-member post, take whatever I say with a hint of salt and remember there's no authority behind it[/small]

However, you can use scratchr2/static instead of get_image for assets.

Scratch--TheCat wrote:

Support. I'd like to use Scratch as an image host in school without having to wait unitl I get home to upload the pictures I want to post on Cubeupload [Cubeupload is blocked on my school computer]

CubeUpload is blocked at my school too. I shared proof on my alt.

<0-0::sensing>//This is Charles; he protects my signature from evil kumquats.
when I'm spawned::events hat//This is the code Charles' brain runs on.
forever
if <[100] > (distance to [an evil kumquat v])> then
delete the evil kumquat::control
end
end

This change is not good imo. They should allow the assets images again. The other option, CubeUpload, doesn't work everywhere.
Edit: Fixed grammar.

<0-0::sensing>//This is Charles; he protects my signature from evil kumquats.
when I'm spawned::events hat//This is the code Charles' brain runs on.
forever
if <[100] > (distance to [an evil kumquat v])> then
delete the evil kumquat::control
end
end

54387a wrote:

However, you can use scratchr2/static instead of get_image for assets.

Nope you can't, just tested it it just comes up with a blank image

DifferentDance8 wrote:

54387a wrote:

However, you can use scratchr2/static instead of get_image for assets.

Nope you can't, just tested it it just comes up with a blank image

However, it does work.
Test:

54387a wrote:

DifferentDance8 wrote:

54387a wrote:

However, you can use scratchr2/static instead of get_image for assets.

Nope you can't, just tested it it just comes up with a blank image

However, it does work.
Test:

Oh cool uzbekistan! /offtopic

Oh, it works! (btw the photo is mine, CC BY-SA 4.0)

Welp doesn't seem to work for me quite right. But anyway, I support this suggestion for the reason that many people (Some would say most) cannot use CubeUpload.

Test 2:

Okay it actually works now

[small]non-member post, take whatever I say with a hint of salt and remember there's no authority behind it[/small]

Important: to use the new method of uploading pictures you need to double the “.%2E/”! part in the URL, so it looks like this:

Of course, use the name you get normally.

kkidslogin wrote:

Welp doesn't seem to work for me quite right. But anyway, I support this suggestion for the reason that many people (Some would say most) cannot use CubeUpload.

Yeah assets was the only way I could post images as I'm not allowed a cubeupload account. So I'm stuck without being able to post any images until then

EDawg2011 wrote:

This change is not good imo. They should allow the assets images again. The other option, CubeUpload, doesn't work everywhere.
Edit: Fixed grammar.

^

<0-0::sensing>//This is Charles; he protects my signature from evil kumquats.
when I'm spawned::events hat//This is the code Charles' brain runs on.
forever
if <[100] > (distance to [an evil kumquat v])> then
delete the evil kumquat::control
end
end

EDawg2011 wrote:

EDawg2011 wrote:

This change is not good imo. They should allow the assets images again. The other option, CubeUpload, doesn't work everywhere.
Edit: Fixed grammar.

^

You bumped your posted?