groups would super cool this is what they would be like

you could do turn based colabaration in the groups but if someone else was editing it you could view it
in order to prevent invite everyone groups there could only be ten members in a group
there would be diffrrent premissions such as

viewers could view projects
editors could edit projects but couldn't share them
group managers could share projects
owners could invite people and promote people


there would also be group comments and a maximum of 3 groups per week to prevent spam

also there would be a scratchers groups where only scratchers could be invited and you could use cloud variable and all groups where new scratchers and scratchers could be invited and there would be no cloud variables


also I made a mock up of the page

Lol studio?

lordibel wrote:

Lol studio?

i'll edit that part out

bobcat0701 wrote:

lordibel wrote:

Lol studio?

i'll edit that part out

No I meant that your suggestion is basically suggesting studios

lordibel wrote:

bobcat0701 wrote:

lordibel wrote:

Lol studio?

i'll edit that part out

No I meant that your suggestion is basically suggesting studios

no its not that read the whole post

bobcat0701 wrote:

lordibel wrote:

bobcat0701 wrote:

lordibel wrote:

Lol studio?

i'll edit that part out

No I meant that your suggestion is basically suggesting studios

no its not that read the whole post

Yes… I did

I have to agree that this seems very much like studios in many aspects. Some parts of this are cool though, and it sounds somewhat similar to classes which are already implemented and therefore give this a level of credibility, so I'll remain indifferent for now.

Support! This is just like Studios and Classes merges into one! I'd think that if you were to, say, end a group once the final product is finished, the users who are in the group get to keep their accounts, too! Win-win scenario.

So basically, you make a group, and within that group, there are four separate ranks you can have — viewer, editor, group managers, and the owner. If I'm understanding this correctly, this could easily be abused. If only the viewers can see the projects in that group, is the project only shared within that group and not shared publicly? If so, users can easily chat amongst themselves through this, making a private group chat.

EZ-Games wrote:

So basically, you make a group, and within that group, there are four separate ranks you can have — viewer, editor, group managers, and the owner. If I'm understanding this correctly, this could easily be abused. If only the viewers can see the projects in that group, is the project only shared within that group and not shared publicly? If so, users can easily chat amongst themselves through this, making a private group chat.

there would be turn based colabaration and

tolors wrote:

at the moment, a turn-based collaboration system for shared projects is NOT rejected

bobcat0701 wrote:

EZ-Games wrote:

So basically, you make a group, and within that group, there are four separate ranks you can have — viewer, editor, group managers, and the owner. If I'm understanding this correctly, this could easily be abused. If only the viewers can see the projects in that group, is the project only shared within that group and not shared publicly? If so, users can easily chat amongst themselves through this, making a private group chat.

there would be turn based colabaration

And…? You can exchange messages still, even if it's turned based.

EZ-Games wrote:

bobcat0701 wrote:

EZ-Games wrote:

So basically, you make a group, and within that group, there are four separate ranks you can have — viewer, editor, group managers, and the owner. If I'm understanding this correctly, this could easily be abused. If only the viewers can see the projects in that group, is the project only shared within that group and not shared publicly? If so, users can easily chat amongst themselves through this, making a private group chat.

there would be turn based colabaration

And…? You can exchange messages still, even if it's turned based.

I edited it to include a quote read that quote

bobcat0701 wrote:

EZ-Games wrote:

bobcat0701 wrote:

EZ-Games wrote:

So basically, you make a group, and within that group, there are four separate ranks you can have — viewer, editor, group managers, and the owner. If I'm understanding this correctly, this could easily be abused. If only the viewers can see the projects in that group, is the project only shared within that group and not shared publicly? If so, users can easily chat amongst themselves through this, making a private group chat.

there would be turn based colabaration

And…? You can exchange messages still, even if it's turned based.

I edited it to include a quote read that quote

Just saw the edit. The main difference between that suggestion and yours is that the projects are public and can be seen by anyone, while yours can only be seen by those within the group. I'm not against turn-based collaboration, I'm against it only being available to a certain and specific few.

Edit: Fixed how I worded some sentences.

look it inpossiable to block invite everyone groups and allow that type of turn based collabaration at the same time

bobcat0701 wrote:

look it inpossiable to block invite everyone groups and allow that type of turn based collabaration at the same time

You're missing the point. What you are suggesting is a private group collaboration. It doesn't matter if it's turn-based, it's private. Collaborating privately, no matter how you go about it, whether it's live or turn-based, is going to be rejected.

no read the sticky

bump

If only some people could see the projects, couldn't you privately message?

Group Raids are bound to happen. I think we can just stick with studios for now, no support. (Also the PM'ing aspect others have mentioned)