You've been playing MW… and forgot about my (I'm WindOctahedron's alternative account) and NambaseKing01's posts.

Computer_Fizz wrote:

I propose we remove the

if < . . . > then
. . .
end

because you can easily work around it like this:

set [x v] to ( 0 )
repeat until < < < . . . > = < ( 1 ) = ( 2 ) > > or < ( x ) = ( 1 ) >
. . .
set [x v] to ( 1 )
end

Why do people keep suggesting these obviously workaroundable blocks!
Credit to pulljosh for the workaround btw

funny

RemixDragon77 wrote:

You've been playing MW… and forgot about my (I'm WindOctahedron's alternative account) and NambaseKing01's posts.

Yikes! It seems I have.

Sorry my friend (you included Nammy). I'll add them to OP pronto.

I also think people shouldn't color support messages like this:

Support!
Semi-support!
No support!

It sort of gives a bad/good vibe, as if “no support” means bad and “support” means good, which isn't necessarily true because people have their own opinions.

Nambaseking01 wrote:

I also think people shouldn't color support messages like this:

Support!
Semi-support!
No support!

It sort of gives a bad/good vibe, as if “no support” means bad and “support” means good, which isn't necessarily true because people have their own opinions.

I've been guilty of doing such a thing, alas, I've stopped doing this.

Is it a common occurrence still? I'm not as active in Suggestions as I used to.

ConfusedBiscuit wrote:

I've been guilty of doing such a thing, alas, I've stopped doing this.

Is it a common occurrence still? I'm not as active in Suggestions as I used to.

I've seen some users still do it.

Nambaseking01 wrote:

I also think people shouldn't color support messages like this:

Support!
Semi-support!
No support!

It sort of gives a bad/good vibe, as if “no support” means bad and “support” means good, which isn't necessarily true because people have their own opinions.

I never thought of it that way…

Starstriker3000 wrote:

I never thought of it that way…

Well, you probably should (no obligations though). It will really make people feel less disappointed.

Nambaseking01 wrote:

Starstriker3000 wrote:

I never thought of it that way…

Well, you probably should (no obligations though). It will really make people feel less disappointed.

Agreed. It makes the Suggestions forum feel very much like a ballot box.

I very much dislike “semi-support” also, because that makes no sense to me, they utilise a ballot system for their vote, yet remain undefined upon casting? They should explain their views and pros / cons they see of the suggestions and suggest improvement.

It all points back to a broken system stemming from strange forum culture.

LastContinue wrote:

Agreed. It makes the Suggestions forum feel very much like a ballot box.

I very much dislike “semi-support” also, because that makes no sense to me, they utilise a ballot system for their vote, yet remain undefined upon casting? They should explain their views and pros / cons they see of the suggestions and suggest improvement.

It all points back to a broken system stemming from strange forum culture.

I know.

This topic is infuriating and is totally against this meta topic…

LastContinue wrote:

I very much dislike “semi-support” also, because that makes no sense to me, they utilise a ballot system for their vote, yet remain undefined upon casting? They should explain their views and pros / cons they see of the suggestions and suggest improvement.

It all points back to a broken system stemming from strange forum culture.

Back when I was a Scratcher, I used the following scale:

Full Support
Support
Neutral Support
Weak Support
No Support

The only reason I abandoned this scale is because I became a Scratch Team member.

Computer_Fizz wrote:

I propose we remove the

if < . . . > then
. . .
end

because you can easily work around it like this:

set [x v] to ( 0 )
repeat until < < < . . . > = < ( 1 ) = ( 2 ) > > or < ( x ) = ( 1 ) >
. . .
set [x v] to ( 1 )
end

Why do people keep suggesting these obviously workaroundable blocks!
Credit to pulljosh for the workaround btw

lets remove lists! that can be achieved by looping over strings where each element is seperated by a comma.

define item (index) of (list)
set [i v] to [0]
set [current index v] to [0]
set [result v] to []
repeat (length of (list))
change (i) by [1]
if <(letter (i) of (list)) = [,]> then
change [current index v] by [1]
else
if <(current index) = (index)> then
set [result v] to (join (result) (letter (i) of (list)))
end
end

Za-Chary wrote:

However, a popular suggestion is this block:

(() ^ ():: operators) 

btw, your example for somthing that has no simple workaround, has a simple workaround:

([10 ^ v] of ((exponent) * ([log v] of (base))))

you might want to change it.

weegaweek wrote:

Za-Chary wrote:

However, a popular suggestion is this block:

(() ^ ():: operators) 

btw, your example for somthing that has no simple workaround, has a simple workaround:

([10 ^ v] of ((exponent) * ([log v] of (base))))

you might want to change it.

I claim that this is not a simple workaround. The counterexample is if you tried to calculate (–2)^2. Your proposed workaround does not work because log(–2) is undefined.

Za-Chary wrote:

I claim that this is not a simple workaround. The counterexample is if you tried to calculate (–2)^2. Your proposed workaround does not work because log(–2) is undefined.

fair enough.

Za-Chary wrote:

Back when I was a Scratcher, I used the following scale:

Full Support
Support
Neutral Support
Weak Support
No Support

The only reason I abandoned this scale is because I became a Scratch Team member.

Personally I wouldn't change my habits just because I go to a higher/better position, but go ahead…

Za-Chary wrote:

LastContinue wrote:

I very much dislike “semi-support” also, because that makes no sense to me, they utilise a ballot system for their vote, yet remain undefined upon casting? They should explain their views and pros / cons they see of the suggestions and suggest improvement.

It all points back to a broken system stemming from strange forum culture.

Back when I was a Scratcher, I used the following scale:

-snip-

I've also heard from someone that you used “negative support”.
Now let's get back on topic. To do so, do not reply to this post, because the off-topic discussion will go on if you do.

Overall, (to me), “Support” and “No Support” aren't the issue I'd want to focus heavily on, but rather the reasoning. It isn't a ballot box, but casting a vote and giving substance (e.g. reasoning and so on) is fine to a degree.

Really, blank “No Supports” would violate the Community Guidelines in my eyes, as “Constructive Criticism” is preached, rather that null, negative statements. An unwarranted “no support” is not too dissimilar from a “no play” on a Project you disagree with.

Since LastContinue has left Scratch, I guess we'll have to bump this topic now, forum helpers… :C

Nambaseking01 wrote:

Since LastContinue has left Scratch, I guess we'll have to bump this topic now, forum helpers… :C

I'm very disappointed.

bump