qloakonscratch wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

qloakonscratch wrote:

Please don't advertise other suggestions in a suggestion unless it is considered a duplicate.

Anyways, I don't think this is very necessary, as it could be added to Account Settings. It just feels like this would add more work for the Scratch Team and Scratch Engineers.

Edit: I found this while researching a few things.

The Scratch Website wrote:

Despite the common drive to add more features to software products, we have found that reducing the number of features often improves the user experience. What initially seems like a constraint or limitation can foster new forms of creativity.

The source for this can be found here. This necessarily means that while adding things to the website, they try to reduce the number of things they have.

Just answering this (because why not):
1. What's this about someone advertising??? And even if this were a duplicate, the original topic wouldn't go into further detail, unlike this topic.
2. Account Settings and Scratch Settings/Personalisation/Personalization are two different things.
3. Despite the fact that less is better, this suggestion would be great!

1. They advertise horizontal blocks and dark mode.
2. No, actually, they aren't. If you enabled these settings, they would only be your personal settings for your specific account, therefore being your account settings.
3. It isn't very useful and is purely aesthetic, not actually adding anything useful to Scratch, which would go against what Scratch said about reducing the amount of features.

VedanshS933 wrote:

~snip~
What not useful? Is it because I told you things?

Despite the common drive to add more features to software products, we have found that reducing the number of features often improves the user experience. What initially seems like a constraint or limitation can foster new forms of creativity.

qloakonscratch wrote:

VedanshS933 wrote:

~snip~
What not useful? Is it because I told you things?

It isn't useful because:
1. None of those suggestions have even been implemented yet.
2. It's better off going in Account Settings
3. It's just a waste of time for the ST.
4. It would be contradictory to the ST's own statement.

Despite the common drive to add more features to software products, we have found that reducing the number of features often improves the user experience. What initially seems like a constraint or limitation can foster new forms of creativity.

VedanshS933 wrote:

2. Account is different then this

Maximouse wrote:

VedanshS933 wrote:

2. Account is different then this

How exactly? Wouldn't both account settings and the ones on this page be saved to the user's account?

VedanshS933 wrote:

qloakonscratch wrote:

VedanshS933 wrote:

~snip~
What not useful? Is it because I told you things?

It isn't useful because:
1. None of those suggestions have even been implemented yet.
2. It's better off going in Account Settings
3. It's just a waste of time for the ST.
4. It would be contradictory to the ST's own statement.

Despite the common drive to add more features to software products, we have found that reducing the number of features often improves the user experience. What initially seems like a constraint or limitation can foster new forms of creativity.

1. They are examples and there is no sense of that page without custmization
2. Account is different then this
3. How?
4. Might be but this IS a SUGGESTION

No, actually, they aren't. If you enabled these settings, they would only be your personal settings for your specific account, therefore being your account settings.

VedanshS933 wrote:

Bring Up This Topic

k0d3rrr wrote:

VedanshS933 wrote:

Bring Up This Topic

Also not even my post.

k0d3rrr wrote:

P.
(That is meant to look like the word ‘bump’.)

k0d3rrr wrote:

P.
(That is meant to look like the word ‘bump’.)

VedanshS933 wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

P.
(That is meant to look like the word ‘bump’.)

Cool…bump
Sorry, you have to wait 60 seconds between posts.

k0d3rrr wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

P.
(That is meant to look like the word ‘bump’.)

VedanshS933 wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

P.
(That is meant to look like the word ‘bump’.)

Cool…bump
Sorry, you have to wait 60 seconds between posts.

Two bumps in one post!

VedanshS933 wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

P.
(That is meant to look like the word ‘bump’.)

VedanshS933 wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

P.
(That is meant to look like the word ‘bump’.)

Cool…bump
Sorry, you have to wait 60 seconds between posts.

Two bumps in one post!

Bump! 3 bumps

VedanshS933 wrote:

VedanshS933 wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

P.
(That is meant to look like the word ‘bump’.)

VedanshS933 wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

P.
(That is meant to look like the word ‘bump’.)

Cool…bump
Sorry, you have to wait 60 seconds between posts.

Two bumps in one post!

Bump! 3 bumps

Bump

k0d3rrr wrote:

VedanshS933 wrote:

VedanshS933 wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

P.
(That is meant to look like the word ‘bump’.)

VedanshS933 wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

P.
(That is meant to look like the word ‘bump’.)

Cool…bump
Sorry, you have to wait 60 seconds between posts.

Two bumps in one post!

Bump! 3 bumps

Bump

Six bumps in a row!
How many more bumps can there be?

VedanshS933 wrote:

-snip-

7 bump

k0d3rrr wrote:

VedanshS933 wrote:

-snip-

7 bump

Err, I think we've gone too far with the bumps.
There are - 10 - bumps now.

k0d3rrr wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

VedanshS933 wrote:

-snip-

7 bump

Err, I think we've gone too far with the bumps.
There are - 10 - bumps now.

There are now - 11 - bumps.

VedanshS933 wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

k0d3rrr wrote:

VedanshS933 wrote:

-snip-

7 bump

Err, I think we've gone too far with the bumps.
There are - 10 - bumps now.

There are now - 11 - bumps.

Yep! :O that was an surprise bump