Seriously. WHY DO THEY EXIST. There are so many of them and they are driving me CRAZY. My suggestion is that they get not only IP banned, but device banned and location banned. And don't just do those, delete every single trace of their account existing from the whole of Scratch. It may seem extreme, but using this system will prevent them from ban evading, giving them a higher chance of getting their account back. (Also, don't just IP block them, block their accounts too) Actually, here's a couple more things the Scratch Team can ban:
-Fingerprint
-Face
-SSN
-Phone number
-Their parent's credit card number
Legally, if the Scratch Team did anything with your personal information that isn't for internal purposes, to enhance your learning experience, communications, academic and scientific research or to enforce the Terms of Use, to defend Scratch's legal rights, and to comply with Scratch's legal obligations and internal policies, we can sue them, so that ensures that Scratch Team won't commit identity theft/buy an iPhone 14 Pro Max and ship it to me through mail using my parent's credit card.

But just why, WHY are these people not blocked yet? They should be, but yet they have the audacity to come to the forums and announce it to the whole wide world! Please Scratch Team, do something.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

-Fingerprint
-Face
-SSN
-Phone number
-Their parent's credit card number

How can they get that info?

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

Zero tolerance policy for ban evaders

There is already basically zero tolerance for ban evaders. The Scratch Team bans those who ban evade, typically without a warning.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

And don't just do those, delete every single trace of their account existing from the whole of Scratch. It may seem extreme, but using this system will prevent them from ban evading, giving them a higher chance of getting their account back.

How is deleting their account going to prevent them from ban evading?

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

(Also, don't just IP block them, block their accounts too)

This already happens — those who ban evade have their accounts blocked.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

Fingerprint

The Scratch Team cannot ban particular fingerprints since Scratch does not collect any fingerprints when creating an account.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

Face

The Scratch Team cannot ban particular faces since Scratch does not collect any faces when creating an account.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

SSN

The Scratch Team cannot ban particular SSNs since Scratch does not collect any SSNs when creating an account.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

Phone number

The Scratch Team cannot ban particular phone numbers since Scratch does not collect any phone numbers when creating an account.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

Their parent's credit card number

The Scratch Team cannot ban particular credit card numbers since Scratch does not collect any credit card numbers when creating an account.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

But just why, WHY are these people not blocked yet? They should be, but yet they have the audacity to come to the forums and announce it to the whole wide world! Please Scratch Team, do something.

They do get blocked, then they ban evade. It's as simple as that.

Don’t know if this post is a joke or not, but when I was banned I used one of my alts to continue to make projects and never interacted with the community (while I was banned) on that alt. As long as there is no activity on that account other than project making, and no project sharing, and the profile itself isn’t breaking any rules, I say it should not be banned.

Gamer_Logan819 wrote:

Don’t know if this post is a joke or not, but when I was banned I used one of my alts to continue to make projects and never interacted with the community (while I was banned) on that alt. As long as there is no activity on that account other than project making, and no project sharing, and the profile itself isn’t breaking any rules, I say it should not be banned.

He means for people who come on the forums asking why they were banned and things

plantskym2 wrote:

Gamer_Logan819 wrote:

Don’t know if this post is a joke or not, but when I was banned I used one of my alts to continue to make projects and never interacted with the community (while I was banned) on that alt. As long as there is no activity on that account other than project making, and no project sharing, and the profile itself isn’t breaking any rules, I say it should not be banned.

He means for people who come on the forums asking why they were banned and things

They shouldn’t be ip banned in that case. They just need to be pointed to contact us or the appeals

this seems a little excessive, don't ya think?

they already do instaban ban evaders as soon as they're found. they do what they can. but I keep seeing you having an obsession with trying to sue ST, its a little weird

are you being so for real rn

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

-Fingerprint
-Face
-SSN
-Phone number
-Their parent's credit card number

where in the tortured poets department planet earth is scratch gonna get that information. That’s an invasion of privacy if they get it without permission, and if they get it with permission if there’s no option to not give the info it’s still an invasion of privacy

Most ban evading users I've seen on the Questions about Scratch forums clearly don't know that they're ban evading (or why they're even banned).

-Rodri wrote:

this seems a little excessive, don't ya think?

I don't think so. If someone were to break the law, then make a fake ID to evade punishment, a police officer would immediately arrest them.

The same thing applies here.

Quantum1993 wrote:

I don't think so. If someone were to break the law, then make a fake ID to evade punishment, a police officer would immediately arrest them.

This doesn't feel like quite right, because they don't know that they're evading the ban (and they don't know why they're getting banned).

It feels more like this:

You go camping in the forest, however, you don't realize that the area you're in is private property. So you camp there, but the person who owns it shows up in the middle of the night and makes you leave, and tells you never to come back. You don't realize that it's private property, so you don't know what you did wrong (trespassing). So, the next day, you go back to ask them why you got kicked out of the forest the first time.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

(#1)
And don't just do those, delete every single trace of their account existing from the whole of Scratch. It may seem extreme, but using this system will prevent them from ban evading, giving them a higher chance of getting their account back.

This is highly incorrect. You are infact making it easier for them to evade. It may be an extraenous comparison, but imagine a burglary trial. The defendant left no evidence at all besides witness testimony. That is not a lot to work with, is it? For all you know, the witness could be lying, and you cannot have a way to prove or disprove it.

Now, look back at your idea. “Delete every single trace of their account existing from the whole(???) of Scratch.” - That is exactly like the situation I mentioned earlier, except burglary is just an example. If it ever came that the ST required some form of proof, then they cannot simply rely on moderator testimony, as people are highly unlikely to trust them, just like with witness and defendant testimony in court of law.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

(#1)
Actually, here's a couple more things the Scratch Team can ban:
-Fingerprint
-Face
-SSN
-Phone number
-Their parent's credit card number

Unless they specifically ask for this information, they cannot ban these.
In general, the ST actually collect a very little amount of personal information, only your exact location and placing cookies.

This'd go way overboard if this much info was asked for, and a child would not be able to provide any of this information, thus making it completely optional unless you want Scratch's userbase to suddenly vanish in 2 goboseconds. And either way this'd still be an extremely odd decision and moreso weird for parents, no matter how much security it'd be promised on, as that just raises the bar of expectation and can easily lead a horrid downfall.

This'd also be quite a bit more to delete in compliance with the GDPR. Though that is definitely obvious, but just in case, take article 4 if you don't see what I mean.
EDIT2: Although this is actually only worth mentioning, but in the long run not actually a problem, probably.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

(#1)
Legally, if the Scratch Team did anything with your personal information that isn't for internal purposes, to enhance your learning experience, communications, academic and scientific research or to enforce the Terms of Use, to defend Scratch's legal rights, and to comply with Scratch's legal obligations and internal policies, we can sue them, so that ensures that Scratch Team won't commit identity theft/buy an iPhone 14 Pro Max and ship it to me through mail using my parent's credit card.

If any ST did even a pixel of that they'd be fired and then possibly arrested since identity theft & identity fraud are both highly illegal, you would infact, not even require to sue them, unless damage is unpaid.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

(#1)
But just why, WHY are these people not blocked yet? They should be, but yet they have the audacity to come to the forums and announce it to the whole wide world! Please Scratch Team, do something.

https://scratch.mit.edu/statistics/

Community statistics at a glance
157 068 086 projects shared,
130 234 055 users registered,
954 490 597 comments posted,
34 460 927 studios created

…and growing!

EDIT: Also, as already mentioned in #3, there is already a zero tolerance policy. They get blasted to the shadow realm even longer.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

But just why, WHY are these people not blocked yet? They should be, but yet they have the audacity to come to the forums and announce it to the whole wide world! Please Scratch Team, do something.

Any sane moderation team usually puts high priority on removing accounts for ban evasion (in addition to any site usage that harms Scratch's community). This is exemplified by people on the other side of Contact Us being able to remove ban evasion accounts in just under a couple of weeks (source: I have reached out twice to ask about ban evading accounts and both responses arrived in a week or so from a real person!!!)

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

Actually, here's a couple more things the Scratch Team can ban:
-Fingerprint
-Face
-SSN
-Phone number
-Their parent's credit card number

For an organization that doesn't actually require this information, this would not be a good look for Scratch

Gamer_Logan819 wrote:

Don’t know if this post is a joke or not, but when I was banned I used one of my alts to continue to make projects and never interacted with the community (while I was banned) on that alt. As long as there is no activity on that account other than project making, and no project sharing, and the profile itself isn’t breaking any rules, I say it should not be banned.

Then why can't they just use the offline editor?

-Rodri wrote:

this seems a little excessive, don't ya think?

Even if it is, they deserve it.

MythosLore wrote:

Quantum1993 wrote:

I don't think so. If someone were to break the law, then make a fake ID to evade punishment, a police officer would immediately arrest them.

This doesn't feel like quite right, because they don't know that they're evading the ban (and they don't know why they're getting banned).

It feels more like this:

You go camping in the forest, however, you don't realize that the area you're in is private property. So you camp there, but the person who owns it shows up in the middle of the night and makes you leave, and tells you never to come back. You don't realize that it's private property, so you don't know what you did wrong (trespassing). So, the next day, you go back to ask them why you got kicked out of the forest the first time.

Even if they didn't know that they were breaking the law, they were breaking the law.

Za-Chary wrote:

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

Fingerprint

The Scratch Team cannot ban particular fingerprints since Scratch does not collect any fingerprints when creating an account.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

Face

The Scratch Team cannot ban particular faces since Scratch does not collect any faces when creating an account.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

SSN

The Scratch Team cannot ban particular SSNs since Scratch does not collect any SSNs when creating an account.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

Phone number

The Scratch Team cannot ban particular phone numbers since Scratch does not collect any phone numbers when creating an account.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

Their parent's credit card number

The Scratch Team cannot ban particular credit card numbers since Scratch does not collect any credit card numbers when creating an account.

Then collect them.

starlightsparker wrote:

where in the tortured poets department planet earth is scratch gonna get that information. That’s an invasion of privacy if they get it without permission, and if they get it with permission if there’s no option to not give the info it’s still an invasion of privacy

Then ask for that info.

ajskateboarder wrote:

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

Actually, here's a couple more things the Scratch Team can ban:
-Fingerprint
-Face
-SSN
-Phone number
-Their parent's credit card number

For an organization that doesn't actually require this information, this would not be a good look for Scratch

The 8 people who care about it will have a field day with this one

Contraery wrote:

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

(#1)
And don't just do those, delete every single trace of their account existing from the whole of Scratch. It may seem extreme, but using this system will prevent them from ban evading, giving them a higher chance of getting their account back.

This is highly incorrect. You are infact making it easier for them to evade. It may be an extraenous comparison, but imagine a burglary trial. The defendant left no evidence at all besides witness testimony. That is not a lot to work with, is it? For all you know, the witness could be lying, and you cannot have a way to prove or disprove it.

Or just throw the trial out the window because the burglar has stole anyway: there's no arguing against it. I see no need for ban appeals because if they are banned, then they clearly did something very wrong.

Contraery wrote:

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

Actually, here's a couple more things the Scratch Team can ban:
-Fingerprint
-Face
-SSN
-Phone number
-Their parent's credit card number

Unless they specifically ask for this information, they cannot ban these.
In general, the ST actually collect a very little amount of personal information, only your exact location and placing cookies.

This'd go way overboard if this much info was asked for, and a child would not be able to provide any of this information, thus making it completely optional unless you want Scratch's userbase to suddenly vanish in 2 goboseconds. And either way this'd still be an extremely odd decision and moreso weird for parents, no matter how much security it'd be promised on, as that just raises the bar of expectation and can easily lead a horrid downfall.

Then ask for the information and have the child ask the parents for their credit card number, and Scratch's userbase would come back in less than 2 goboseconds. The only people who will complain about this are ban evaders and around 99.99999% of Scratchers.

Gamer_Logan819 wrote:

Don’t know if this post is a joke or not, but when I was banned I used one of my alts to continue to make projects and never interacted with the community (while I was banned) on that alt. As long as there is no activity on that account other than project making, and no project sharing, and the profile itself isn’t breaking any rules, I say it should not be banned.

Strictly speaking, this is still not allowed — if the Scratch Team sees that the account is being used to ban evade, then it may be banned. That being said, I do recognize that it would be hard to tell that someone is ban evading with an account that does zero engagement with the community. But it's not exactly “allowed.”

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

Then collect them.

They're not necessary, though. In particular, collecting phone numbers is illegal, since Scratch is a website for minors. I don't know the details about the others, but I imagine the rest of them are similarly illegal.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

The 8 people who care about it will have a field day with this one

I'm actually pretty sure that there is only 1 Scratcher who cares about the Scratch Team collecting this information from others.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

Or just throw the trial out the window because the burglar has stole anyway: there's no arguing against it. I see no need for ban appeals because if they are banned, then they clearly did something very wrong.

You can't, as you can't prove the defendant neither innocent nor guilty, unless the witness contradicts something, in which case, it'll become a mess of a trial.
Plus if it's within for example the US, abiding by the Fifth Amendment, a citizen would have the right to stand a fair trial. Simply throwing it out won't work. Though that's enough of the example.

And also, ban appeals are actually a good thing to have, even if someone can just fake it all the way, they'll get punished later again.

TheUltimateHoodie wrote:

Then ask for the information and have the child ask the parents for their credit card number, and Scratch's userbase would come back in less than 2 goboseconds. The only people who will complain about this are ban evaders and around 99.99999% of Scratchers.

… Despite the fact that parents must provide financial support until their child is a certain age, not a singular parent is gonna trust that and you know it.

We already take what actions we can to discourage ban evading. Some actions are not always possible in all cases.

Please continue to report when you find them.