glitcX wrote:

(#20)

busybuddie1234 wrote:

that's just stealing youtube's features at this point

It's actually in a LOT of websites, the only website that scratch lets me say that has that is replit, there's a lot more sites but scratch doesn't let me mention them

and, because of that, that means scratch has to have it too?
what's the point of this? unless this is an optional change (i.e. scratch.mit.edu/@user redirects to scratch.mit.edu/users/user or vice versa) this is going to break a lot of sites with little to no payout…and even if it is an optional change it'll still have little to no payout, since most people are hardwired to go to /users/ and will not even notice the change. one of jvvg's essays on scratch wiki (link unavailable) talks about how even the smallest of features takes a lot of time and resources to add to a site like scratch… so no support

SonicFanX123_321 wrote:

glitcX wrote:

(#20)

busybuddie1234 wrote:

that's just stealing youtube's features at this point

It's actually in a LOT of websites, the only website that scratch lets me say that has that is replit, there's a lot more sites but scratch doesn't let me mention them

and, because of that, that means scratch has to have it too?
what's the point of this? unless this is an optional change (i.e. scratch.mit.edu/@user redirects to scratch.mit.edu/users/user or vice versa) this is going to break a lot of sites with little to no payout…and even if it is an optional change it'll still have little to no payout, since most people are hardwired to go to /users/ and will not even notice the change. one of jvvg's essays on scratch wiki (link unavailable) talks about how even the smallest of features takes a lot of time and resources to add to a site like scratch… so no support

Yes, I thought /users/glitcX would redirect to /@glitcX

glitcX wrote:

(#22)

SonicFanX123_321 wrote:

glitcX wrote:

(#20)

busybuddie1234 wrote:

that's just stealing youtube's features at this point

It's actually in a LOT of websites, the only website that scratch lets me say that has that is replit, there's a lot more sites but scratch doesn't let me mention them

and, because of that, that means scratch has to have it too?
what's the point of this? unless this is an optional change (i.e. scratch.mit.edu/@user redirects to scratch.mit.edu/users/user or vice versa) this is going to break a lot of sites with little to no payout…and even if it is an optional change it'll still have little to no payout, since most people are hardwired to go to /users/ and will not even notice the change. one of jvvg's essays on scratch wiki (link unavailable) talks about how even the smallest of features takes a lot of time and resources to add to a site like scratch… so no support

Yes, I thought /users/glitcX would redirect to /@glitcX

still, that sounds like a lot of work for little to no payout. most people won't even notice the change, unless scratch team pushes out @'s and display names like youtube or makes an annoucement about it. most people are hardwired to go to /users/x not /@x. not to mention /@ looks ugly, but still, people won't notice if this gets added. too much work for people to not notice it.

plus, this change is overrated, and also plus, youtube has not only @'s but also user- and display names. does that mean scratch has to have it too?

SonicFanX123_321 wrote:

glitcX wrote:

(#22)

SonicFanX123_321 wrote:

glitcX wrote:

(#20)

busybuddie1234 wrote:

that's just stealing youtube's features at this point

It's actually in a LOT of websites, the only website that scratch lets me say that has that is replit, there's a lot more sites but scratch doesn't let me mention them

and, because of that, that means scratch has to have it too?
what's the point of this? unless this is an optional change (i.e. scratch.mit.edu/@user redirects to scratch.mit.edu/users/user or vice versa) this is going to break a lot of sites with little to no payout…and even if it is an optional change it'll still have little to no payout, since most people are hardwired to go to /users/ and will not even notice the change. one of jvvg's essays on scratch wiki (link unavailable) talks about how even the smallest of features takes a lot of time and resources to add to a site like scratch… so no support

Yes, I thought /users/glitcX would redirect to /@glitcX

still, that sounds like a lot of work for little to no payout. most people won't even notice the change, unless scratch team pushes out @'s and display names like youtube or makes an annoucement about it. most people are hardwired to go to /users/x not /@x. not to mention /@ looks ugly, but still, people won't notice if this gets added. too much work for people to not notice it.

plus, this change is overrated, and also plus, youtube has not only @'s but also user- and display names. does that mean scratch has to have it too?

No, display names are officially rejected.

SonicFanX123_321 wrote:

glitcX wrote:

(#22)

SonicFanX123_321 wrote:

glitcX wrote:

(#20)

busybuddie1234 wrote:

that's just stealing youtube's features at this point

It's actually in a LOT of websites, the only website that scratch lets me say that has that is replit, there's a lot more sites but scratch doesn't let me mention them

and, because of that, that means scratch has to have it too?
what's the point of this? unless this is an optional change (i.e. scratch.mit.edu/@user redirects to scratch.mit.edu/users/user or vice versa) this is going to break a lot of sites with little to no payout…and even if it is an optional change it'll still have little to no payout, since most people are hardwired to go to /users/ and will not even notice the change. one of jvvg's essays on scratch wiki (link unavailable) talks about how even the smallest of features takes a lot of time and resources to add to a site like scratch… so no support

Yes, I thought /users/glitcX would redirect to /@glitcX

still, that sounds like a lot of work for little to no payout. most people won't even notice the change, unless scratch team pushes out @'s and display names like youtube or makes an annoucement about it. most people are hardwired to go to /users/x not /@x. not to mention /@ looks ugly, but still, people won't notice if this gets added. too much work for people to not notice it.

plus, this change is overrated, and also plus, youtube has not only @'s but also user- and display names. does that mean scratch has to have it too?

This will be for usernames and not display names as display names are officialy rejected

VedanshS933 wrote:

(#25)

SonicFanX123_321 wrote:

glitcX wrote:

(#22)

SonicFanX123_321 wrote:

glitcX wrote:

(#20)

busybuddie1234 wrote:

that's just stealing youtube's features at this point

It's actually in a LOT of websites, the only website that scratch lets me say that has that is replit, there's a lot more sites but scratch doesn't let me mention them

and, because of that, that means scratch has to have it too?
what's the point of this? unless this is an optional change (i.e. scratch.mit.edu/@user redirects to scratch.mit.edu/users/user or vice versa) this is going to break a lot of sites with little to no payout…and even if it is an optional change it'll still have little to no payout, since most people are hardwired to go to /users/ and will not even notice the change. one of jvvg's essays on scratch wiki (link unavailable) talks about how even the smallest of features takes a lot of time and resources to add to a site like scratch… so no support

Yes, I thought /users/glitcX would redirect to /@glitcX

still, that sounds like a lot of work for little to no payout. most people won't even notice the change, unless scratch team pushes out @'s and display names like youtube or makes an annoucement about it. most people are hardwired to go to /users/x not /@x. not to mention /@ looks ugly, but still, people won't notice if this gets added. too much work for people to not notice it.

plus, this change is overrated, and also plus, youtube has not only @'s but also user- and display names. does that mean scratch has to have it too?

This will be for usernames and not display names as display names are officialy rejected

yes, but the rest of my point still stands. it's not a good feature, as it's too minor and most people won't notice it (this doesn't even compare to the plsc forum that was added, I and other people did in fact notice it, but most people aren't conditioned to look at the URI)…

bump

bump

No support, it's only a few extra letters.

I do have to raise the question of why, as making the old URLs redirect to the new URLs permanently effectively just makes this a cosmetic change.