Restoring Curators and Projects

TapingAnimations

TapingAnimations wrote:
So your saying the Restore Curators button restores a members if they got kicked out for no reason and Restore Projects button restores projects that a member removed?

Illusion705

TapingAnimations wrote:
TapingAnimations wrote:
So your saying the Restore Curators button restores a members if they got kicked out for no reason and Restore Projects button restores projects that a member removed?

It would be used more for raids where many curators or projects need to be restored. If only one curator got removed, they could easily be invited back.

TopicBumper

Bump.

the2000

portalpower wrote:
easy workaround: don't promote random people

…Sorry, I would feel incomplete if I didn't post this on every raid prevention suggestion at this point

Of course I still have that philosophy here, but something about this appeals to me slightly more than the average one of those. I don't know what it is, maybe the fact that it still requires someone to actually take action as opposed to making the studio completely bulletproof and immune to the consequences of the bad decisions?

I still don't like it that much though. I think it should only be available to the owner, not to all managers, considering that you could easily raid a studio by doing "restore projects/curators since [insert date before the studio was created]". Also, this would bring back everyone, including the person who started the raid, which could be problematic to say the least. Even if those were fixed I wouldn't personally approve of this suggestion, but those things could make it better.

Illusion705

the2000 wrote:
portalpower wrote:
easy workaround: don't promote random people
…Sorry, I would feel incomplete if I didn't post this on every raid prevention suggestion at this point Of course I still have that philosophy here, but something about this appeals to me slightly more than the average one of those. I don't know what it is, maybe the fact that it still requires someone to actually take action as opposed to making the studio completely bulletproof and immune to the consequences of the bad decisions?

I still don't like it that much though. I think it should only be available to the owner, not to all managers, considering that you could easily raid a studio by doing "restore projects/curators since [insert date before the studio was created]". Also, this would bring back everyone, including the person who started the raid, which could be problematic to say the least. Even if those were fixed I wouldn't personally approve of this suggestion, but those things could make it better.

To make sure that the raider is not added back, restoring curators won't restore anyone that removed themselves, and if someone else removed them, since it only re-adds people that were removed by a certain person, it won't re-add them. Originally I wanted it to be available to all managers because some studios have owners that are no longer active. Now though, I realize that if a studio gets raided, and the owner is inactive, an ST member could always restore everything. I'll go ahead and change it to owner only.

the2000

Illusion705 wrote:
the2000 wrote:
-snip-
To make sure that the raider is not added back, restoring curators won't restore anyone that removed themselves, and if someone else removed them, since it only re-adds people that were removed by a certain person, it won't re-add them. Originally I wanted it to be available to all managers because some studios have owners that are no longer active. Now though, I realize that if a studio gets raided, and the owner is inactive, an ST member could always restore everything. I'll go ahead and change it to owner only.

Restoring studios after a raid is, at the very best, the least important part of a Scratch Team member's job. If a studio gets raided, that's the fault of the management. If a studio gets raided and the owner is inactive, you should've already moved to a different studio. (It would be nice if we could transfer studio ownership, but you get what I'm saying.)

Ihatr

bump

CoolLionMan

I feel your OP seems to be a little like “this person didn't like my suggestion!” with that “non-supporters” thing, you could link the post that contains why they didn't support

TopCode

no support, very easy workaround, dont promote people you dont completely trust.

Ihatr

TopCode wrote:
no support, very easy workaround, dont promote people you dont completely trust.

This isn't a solution though!

Oh, we need an undo button? Nah, just don't screw up!

Oh, we need cool custom blocks? Nah, just move to snap!

Oh, we need a cool suggestion? Nah, just use this workaround which isn't a workaround!

Last edited by Ihatr (March 7, 2021 04:08:20)

TopCode

Ihatr wrote:
TopCode wrote:
no support, very easy workaround, dont promote people you dont completely trust.
This isn't a solution though!

Oh, we need an undo button? Nah, just don't screw up!

Oh, we need cool custom blocks? Nah, just move to snap!

Oh, we need a cool suggestion? Nah, just use this workaround which isn't a workaround!

lets see, when do you promote random people anyways? not often probably unless its a “get this to x managers” studio. and there already is an undo button, so dunno wut you mean. in most cases this is useless, and it would probably cause issues with random things getting undone

Ihatr

TopCode wrote:
in most cases this is useless

B I A S

TopCode wrote:
and it would probably cause issues with random things getting undone

Then redo those few things! It's better off than losing your studio!

TopCode wrote:
lets see, when do you promote random people anyways?

Any noob to the internet will think that people are what they appear to be. Any way to prevent this would be nice.

Illusion705

CoolLionMan wrote:
I feel your OP seems to be a little like “this person didn't like my suggestion!” with that “non-supporters” thing, you could link the post that contains why they didn't support

The posts are already linked (click the names of the non supporters to see each of their posts), and I don't think it's mean at all. It shows who likes the idea and gives a link to the post where they talked about why they like it, and it shows who doesn't like it and links to the post where they talk about why they don't like it. This allows easy navigation to all of the pros and cons of my idea. I'm not trying to shame non-supporters. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and everyone has their own view on things. It's important to be able to see everyone's opinion on the idea, so that's why there is a list of all of the supporters, semi-supporters, and non-supporters along with a link to their posts.

TopCode wrote:
no support, very easy workaround, dont promote people you dont completely trust.

Thanks for the feedback! This may be true, however there are still many studios that use promoting everyone as a way of gaining attention to a studio (such as pfp trend studios), and there are many people that don't know any better than to promote everyone. Keep in mind that Scratch is meant for people of all ages, and a lot of scratchers are younger kids that don't know better, or they may think that they can trust someone, but really they shouldn't. Also, sometimes people that are trusted end up doing bad things. For example, the Wiki Contributors studio I believe got raided a while ago because they thought they could trust Scratch Wiki Contributors, and they could for a while, but eventually one of them decided to raid the studio.

Last edited by Illusion705 (March 7, 2021 04:35:39)

leahcimto

Wow, surprised that this is the earliest topic I found like this

Support. I don't see any cons, and this would help with studio raids. Although I do normally have this “Only promote people you trust” mindset, I do think this would be good as it really does no harm. Of course, if you want to prevent something like this from happening in the future you shouldn't promote people you don't trust (unless it's a studio where you would want to), but having this makes sense.

I do have one question though— how many projects would be restored? If someone removed a few projects because they were unrelated, but then the raider removed a bunch because they're a raider, what projects would the system add back? Would you be able to select a timeframe, or username, etc?

TheAdriCoolManDude

I support this. While I may not use this, I know that there are many people who may have accidently removed projects off a studio or accidently removed a curator. As for studio raids, this is definitely helpful, while you can argue that you shouldn't invite people that you don't trust, I know people that I have trusted that ruined things of mine, there are definitely people who violate your trust. And someone else you trusted could add people that they may not have known what they would have done. Even then, why would you not want to help people whose studios got raided, restricting them from having solutions to the problem because the problem should have never happened isn't a good idea in my opinion.

leahcimto

bump

unicornstartower89

Ham19-01-2011 wrote:
Illusion705 wrote:
Restoring Curators and Projects

It can be really annoying when someone removes all of the projects and curators from one of your studios, but I have a suggestion that will make adding these projects and curators back a lot easier!

Note: By curators I mean curators and managers.

My suggestion is to add two buttons on the activity tab which could be used by managers. One says “Restore curators”, and the other says “Restore projects”. Here's what this could look like:

Restore Curators: This button would require the manager to enter a starting and ending time and date of which the curators were removed and who they were removed by. To make sure that a manager can't add back a ton of curators from a really long time ago, they can only add back curators that were removed 24 hours or less ago. This button will also not add back curators that were removed by themselves for two reasons:

1- to make sure that they aren't inviting back people that don't want to curate using this button
2- to make sure that the person who messed up the studio isn't invited back if they removed them self

Restore Projects: This button would work exactly like the “Restore curators” button except it would add projects back instead of curators.

Let me know what you think of this idea and how it can be improved. Thanks :)

Supporters:
@Burgher1679
@Illusion705
@JPOWERPUFFGIRLS
@LydzWinry

Semi Supporters:
@Bluebatstar
@Yeetoburro1

Non Supporters:
@FloatingMuffins
Hi, I have a suggestion, that would add to it.
There would be a list called troublemakers and the owner would be the only one who could edit it. The owner could add someone's name to it. And if someone attempts to invite them, they wouldn't be able to! Only the owner could remove people's names too. New Scratchers wouldn't be allowed to use it in case they are a spammer and add Scratchers who tried to reported the spammer for what he has done to the Troublemakers list.

Also, I think the “Restore projects” and “Restore curators” buttons should only be available to owners instead of managers.
As @JPOWERPUFFGIRLS suggested below, the list will only be visible to managers to avoid hurting Scratchers feelings.

Anyways, Support!

Support! I think it’s a great idea to add a troublemakers list! I suggest that you add a “recently removed” list so the owner and managers can choose who they want to invite back instead of having to go searching for a scratchers username or restoring all curators and having to delete the ones that don’t want to be invited back. That goes the same for projects. (Basically if someone clicks “restore curators or projects”, they will have the option to add back a recently removed project/curator, or add them all back

Illusion705

leahcimto wrote:
Wow, surprised that this is the earliest topic I found like this

Support. I don't see any cons, and this would help with studio raids. Although I do normally have this “Only promote people you trust” mindset, I do think this would be good as it really does no harm. Of course, if you want to prevent something like this from happening in the future you shouldn't promote people you don't trust (unless it's a studio where you would want to), but having this makes sense.

I do have one question though— how many projects would be restored? If someone removed a few projects because they were unrelated, but then the raider removed a bunch because they're a raider, what projects would the system add back? Would you be able to select a timeframe, or username, etc?

Thanks for the support!

Yes, they would select a timeframe and the user that removed the projects/curators.

Illusion705

TheAdriCoolManDude wrote:
I support this. While I may not use this, I know that there are many people who may have accidently removed projects off a studio or accidently removed a curator. As for studio raids, this is definitely helpful, while you can argue that you shouldn't invite people that you don't trust, I know people that I have trusted that ruined things of mine, there are definitely people who violate your trust. And someone else you trusted could add people that they may not have known what they would have done. Even then, why would you not want to help people whose studios got raided, restricting them from having solutions to the problem because the problem should have never happened isn't a good idea in my opinion.

I agree, thanks for the support!

unicornstartower89 wrote:
Ham19-01-2011 wrote:
snip

Support! I think it’s a great idea to add a troublemakers list! I suggest that you add a “recently removed” list so the owner and managers can choose who they want to invite back instead of having to go searching for a scratchers username or restoring all curators and having to delete the ones that don’t want to be invited back. That goes the same for projects. (Basically if someone clicks “restore curators or projects”, they will have the option to add back a recently removed project/curator, or add them all back

Thanks for the support!

Discuss Scratch