mumu245 wrote:

(#41)
The best way to reference it would be:

Are you even allowed to show browser extension icons

But yea, I agree that nono word is just a workaround for the actual name. If you want to refer to a browser extension, just say “a browser extension”, explaining why you can't say the actual name if necessary.

ScratchCat1038 wrote:

But yea, I agree that nono word is just a workaround for the actual name. If you want to refer to a browser extension, just say “a browser extension”, explaining why you can't say the actual name if necessary.

Then, The Xtension will become that workaround.

mumu245 wrote:

ScratchCat1038 wrote:

But yea, I agree that nono word is just a workaround for the actual name. If you want to refer to a browser extension, just say “a browser extension”, explaining why you can't say the actual name if necessary.

Then, The Xtension will become that workaround.

what would stop you from simply saying “browser extension”? There's only a problem when you name or link a browser extension.

no support. what if somebody asks something like this:

I've seen. people with pause buttons on scratch projects. How can I get this?

without this policy, you can say:

Oh, just use a scratch browser extension. Due to scratch's rules, I can't say what it's called though.

but with this policy, what are you supposed to say?
so yeah, no support unless I've understood this wrong

Bestdragon234 wrote:

wikibro300000 wrote:

Bestdragon234 wrote:

Actually that would make scratch worse as the nono thing is a meme, removing all references would make scratch not funny

False

IT IS A MEME

it's not a meme? Unless your talking about the certain song that became a meme, which I cannot say due to it having an inappropriate meaning. Besides not many people actually think it's a funny song, the trend died down like a year ago.

mumu245 wrote:

The best way to reference it would be:

people could quite easily find out what that is referencing, and besides you can only upload images to comments/topics on the forums so it's definitely not a good way to reference it.

EngineerRunner wrote:

no support. what if somebody asks something like this:

I've seen. people with pause buttons on scratch projects. How can I get this?

without this policy, you can say:

Oh, just use a scratch browser extension. Due to scratch's rules, I can't say what it's called though.

but with this policy, what are you supposed to say?
so yeah, no support unless I've understood this wrong

That's the point - the original browser extension policy says that people should not be encouraging others to download any browser extension, and your example does just that.

i_eat_coffee wrote:

EngineerRunner wrote:

no support. what if somebody asks something like this:

I've seen. people with pause buttons on scratch projects. How can I get this?

without this policy, you can say:

Oh, just use a scratch browser extension. Due to scratch's rules, I can't say what it's called though.

but with this policy, what are you supposed to say?
so yeah, no support unless I've understood this wrong

That's the point - the original browser extension policy says that people should not be encouraging others to download any browser extension, and your example does just that.

but how are they meant to know what the browser extension is called if they just say “scratch browser extension”? There are quite alot of scratch browser extensions out there.

BendyOl183 wrote:

i_eat_coffee wrote:

EngineerRunner wrote:

no support. what if somebody asks something like this:

I've seen. people with pause buttons on scratch projects. How can I get this?

without this policy, you can say:

Oh, just use a scratch browser extension. Due to scratch's rules, I can't say what it's called though.

but with this policy, what are you supposed to say?
so yeah, no support unless I've understood this wrong

That's the point - the original browser extension policy says that people should not be encouraging others to download any browser extension, and your example does just that.

but how are they meant to know what the browser extension is called if they just say “scratch browser extension”? There are quite alot of scratch browser extensions out there.

THEY ARE NOT
They are NOT supposed to know what the browser extension is called
Read the policy https://scratch-mit-edu.ezproxyberklee.flo.org/discuss/topic/284272/

i_eat_coffee wrote:

BendyOl183 wrote:

i_eat_coffee wrote:

EngineerRunner wrote:

no support. what if somebody asks something like this:

I've seen. people with pause buttons on scratch projects. How can I get this?

without this policy, you can say:

Oh, just use a scratch browser extension. Due to scratch's rules, I can't say what it's called though.

but with this policy, what are you supposed to say?
so yeah, no support unless I've understood this wrong

That's the point - the original browser extension policy says that people should not be encouraging others to download any browser extension, and your example does just that.

but how are they meant to know what the browser extension is called if they just say “scratch browser extension”? There are quite alot of scratch browser extensions out there.

THEY ARE NOT
They are NOT supposed to know what the browser extension is called
Read the policy https://scratch-mit-edu.ezproxyberklee.flo.org/discuss/topic/284272/

Why are you getting so angered? I've literally read the policy over 3 times a year ago and what I was saying was that someone isn't going to know what browser extension someone's talking about if they just say “scratch browser extension” since there are MULTIPLE scratch browser extensions last time I checked, I'm not saying that they have to know or something so I don't get why you seem so fussed about it, because that wasn't the original intention of my last post. I don't see a reason to filter “no no word” since that's even more of a cryptic message anyway.

Besides, why “no-no word” specifically? What stops someone from saying “discouraged word” or something along the lines of that.

BendyOl183 wrote:

-snip-

Why are you getting so angered? I've literally read the policy over 3 times a year ago and what I was saying was that someone isn't going to know what browser extension someone's talking about if they just say “scratch browser extension” since there are MULTIPLE scratch browser extensions last time I checked, I'm not saying that they have to know or something so I don't get why you seem so fussed about it, because that wasn't the original intention of my last post. I don't see a reason to filter “no no word” since that's even more of a cryptic message anyway.

Besides, why “no-no word” specifically? What stops someone from saying “discouraged word” or something along the lines of that.

Firstly, I have anger issues, so please excuse me, but I wasn't trying to express anger in my previous message. I was highlighting a fact.

Second, they aren't even supposed to know the browser extension, and banning “no-no word” will discourage users from continuing to advertise the browser extension.

i_eat_coffee wrote:

Second, they aren't even supposed to know the browser extension, and banning “no-no word” will discourage users from continuing to advertise the browser extension.

That is literally what I said in my last post. How would someone know what a person is advertising if they just say “no-no word”. I don't think it should be filtered because it's literally harmless, lets say there was a browser extension that gave you infinite loves on a project and someone told someone about it like this :

scratch user wrote:

have you heard of the new browser extension that gives you infinite loves on your project?

That basically says what it does, however someone would only know what they were talking about if they even knew the name of the extension.

on the other hand, if they said this :

scratch user wrote:

have you heard of the new browser extension?

Pretty much nobody would know what they'd be talking about because they haven't listed any of it's features so they can't link the two up. Besides they could be talking about any browser extension that recently came out if they worded it that way.

And I don't think alot of users keep track of new browser extensions anyway because they're only really interested in the certain one that is very popularly used.

so, in short, I don't think it should be filtered because it is basically harmless. That is the most detailed way I can explain it.

How can you ban a reference without people creating aliases for the reference?

People might use “as” which is backwards for sa, which is the acronym for no no-word

Sliverus wrote:

Does this apply to the forums, or just the main site? I'd argue more people talk about “nono word” on the forums than the main site, especially in conversations about dark mode.

theresnopurpose wrote:

the last two are ones I do not agree with, and the first one would be okay if it's more focused on the first part of the sentence
(im i_eat_coffee's alt)

Ok…but that's not the original suggestion. The original suggestion says to ban ALL no-no word references. The fact that you accept a bit of leeway, isn't consistent with the original suggestion.

With that being said, I would like to ask: Has your stance on the suggestion changed since you first made this topic? Once you've addressed this, I'll share my thoughts.

Let me clarify: This is a question.

Probably the best way to handle this would be moderation. If someone is trying to sneakily reference a browser extension and it's becoming a problem, the comment can be removed.

D-ScratchNinja wrote:

Probably the best way to handle this would be moderation. If someone is trying to sneakily reference a browser extension and it's becoming a problem, the comment can be removed.

This about sums up my take on this suggestion.

In this case, it would be best to report comments stating to download “nono word.” The phrase “nono word” in of itself doesn't violate the policy, as you are not stating the name of the extension, which makes it significantly harder to find. The phrase is also generally used to help explain the browser extension policy, so banning that phrase means you are banning something that is mostly used to help explain a policy. Besides, people will do what they always do, which is find another phrase to use in order to reference browser extensions in general.

Another point in favor of not censoring “nono word,” it is not necessarily clear that one is referencing a particular browser extension. In other words, User1 could be using “nono word” to reference Extension A, but User2 could be using that same phrase to reference Extension B.

As I said before, the best way to handle people mentioning browser extensions via a phrase is to report the instances in which they are encouraging others to download it. To further clarify what I mean, if a user answers a question about how to get dark mode with “There is a no-no word with that feature, but it is not allowed to be named as per the browser extension policy, but there is a suggestion for an official dark mode on Scratch.” then that is perfectly fine, as it isn't encouraging anyone to do anything. However, if a user had responded to that question with “Nono word is a browser extension with that feature. You'll have to download it if you want dark mode at this point in time.” I could see why it would be reported.

DarthVader4Life wrote:

Another point in favor of not censoring “nono word,” it is not necessarily clear that one is referencing a particular browser extension. In other words, User1 could be using “nono word” to reference Extension A, but User2 could be using that same phrase to reference Extension B.

Okay, but that would still be disallowed, since no browser extensions should be referenced; the policy isn't about one particular browser extension.

i_eat_coffee wrote:

DarthVader4Life wrote:

Another point in favor of not censoring “nono word,” it is not necessarily clear that one is referencing a particular browser extension. In other words, User1 could be using “nono word” to reference Extension A, but User2 could be using that same phrase to reference Extension B.

Okay, but that would still be disallowed, since no browser extensions should be referenced; the policy isn't about one particular browser extension.

You've taken what I meant out of context. I was saying that “nono word” is ambiguous and won't necessarily be used by everyone to reference a singular browser extension as a bit of a side note. The example was to provide an explanation on why “nono word” itself isn't very clear on the specifics of what it is used to mention. Again, utilizing a case by case basis, reporting comments that tell or otherwise encourage others to download the nono words is the best solution to that problem, rather than censoring a phrase that isn't actually the problem.

But if you ban saying ‘no-no word’ then you can't write this thread-