Scratch

RocksAndFire wrote:

bananaman114 wrote:

andresmh wrote:

if (account X blocked == TRUE
AND account X acknowledges off site harassment == TRUE
AND account X refuses to stop off site harassment = TRUE) {
    set account x block = TRUE
}

I would say that offsite activities are  taken into consideration after we have found violations to our TOU  in our site or when we receive requests to unblock an account.

We need GlitchSprite XD

Why

He made an actual script like that, you know, like BYOB style, I'm pretty sure its on page 4..

Sunrise-Moon wrote:

andresmh wrote:

if (account X blocked == TRUE
AND account X acknowledges off site harassment == TRUE
AND account X refuses to stop off site harassment = TRUE) {
    set account x block = TRUE
}

I would say that offsite activities are  taken into consideration after we have found violations to our TOU  in our site or when we receive requests to unblock an account.

Is that [partly] a real language? It looks a bit like Objective-C.

It's pseudocode, really. A nice way to rough something out without worrying about syntax.
Perhaps we should add the Scratch version to the original post.

RocksAndFire wrote:

PlayWithFire wrote:

hmmm RHY, what a waste of talent...

IKR

Yeah.....

Hold on, I'm writing a response...

majormax wrote:

Terms of Use
Welcome to the Scratch Community!
As part of the Scratch community, you are sharing projects and ideas with people:
• from many different countries and cultures
• of all ages (from young children to teens and grandparents)
• with all levels of experience
We need your help to make this community a supportive place for every member. Here's how you can help:
Be respectful. When sharing projects or posting comments, remember that people of many different ages and backgrounds will see your contributions.
Offer constructive comments. Instead of just criticizing a project or forum post, say what you like about it and offer suggestions on how to make it better.
Give credit. Feel free to make modified versions of other people's projects - just make sure to give them credit. One place to give credit is in your Project Notes.
Be honest. Don't pretend to be someone other than who you are or try to game the community.
Keep personal information private. Don't share your email address, phone number, or other personal contact information.
Help keep the site friendly. If you feel others would find a project or comment mean, insulting, too violent, or otherwise inappropriate, click the link that says "flag as inappropriate."  In the Forums, you can do the same thing by clicking on the "Report" link below a post. The Scratch team will review, and may remove any project, comment or post.
All projects shared on the Scratch website, as well as the Scratch support materials, are shared under the Creative Commons license with the conditions: Attribution - Share Alike. The Scratch software is completely free of charge and its source code is available under the Scratch License. The software behind the Scratch website is under the General Public License version 2.
To learn more about Scratch moderation policies, visit the Moderation on the Scratch website page.
Check back here from time-to-time, because we are always trying to improve our guidelines. Please post any suggestions on the Scratch Suggestions page or on the forums.
Thank you for joining and contributing to the Scratch community!
Scratch Team
Lifelong Kindergarten Group
MIT Media Lab

That really doesn't say anything about "offsite material". He really didn't break the TOU. Unless there were other things on scratch.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

The original block happened 4 months and 2 weeks ago for disrespectful posts in the forums. Read upthread for more discussion on this.

bananaman114 wrote:

RocksAndFire wrote:

bananaman114 wrote:

We need GlitchSprite XD

Why

He made an actual script like that, you know, like BYOB style, I'm pretty sure its on page 4..

Here, I made one for him:

TuffGhost wrote:

PlayWithFire wrote:

hmmm RHY, what a waste of talent...

wow dude way to be completely disrespectful

no i don't think so, it's the truth, he's choosing to be disrespectful to others and now he can't post his games no matter how amazing they are.

antimonyarsenide wrote:

I think that those messages, and RHY's replies, are subject to some degree of varying interpretation.
Andres's interpretation is reasonable when those messages are used as a standalone source, but from what I know of the parties involved and the events being discussed, I don't think that interpretation really expresses RHY's opinions accurately.

andresmh wrote:

1. As you can see he does not accept to stop violating the TOU.

He says  "I can't make any promises on confrontation with people angry at me because of the (offsite material)" .
Also, when asked "Will you agree to stop?" there was no explicit response to it and instead RHY just request to  "at least visible to users not logged into the website", which we agreed to do.

"I can't make any promises on confrontation with people angry at me because of the (offsite material)" (line 54 on the note) expresses not an unwillingness to stop being respectful, but a lack of certainty in his ability to avoid verbally retaliating against people who attack him because of his previous involvement with the [offsite material].

There was in fact a response to "Will you agree to stop?" in the message; RHY answered on line 18: "The scratchy scratch group will not stop while the community is in a [state the group cannot tolerate]. I personally don't post comics that often[...]"
Personally, I think RHY is saying that he doesn't have control over the actions of the others in the group. Although it's true that he doesn't agree to stop personal involvement in the offsite material, he seems to be seeking for a compromise between his group and the maturity of the Scratch community, therefore waiting for a response from the Scratch Team about that compromise.

andresmh wrote:

2. RHY also acknowledges creating at least one more account and using mechanisms to circumvent a block. Both things are not allowed by the TOU, they are considered dishonest and an attempt at "game the community".

Yes, and as the Scratch Team has already mentioned, this will lengthen RHY's ban. However, on line 68, the scratch team says:
"If what you say matches well enough with what we've seen, we may choose to trust you again and unblock your account."
The word "may" creates a loophole; however, if this loophole is being used for the Team's argument, then the above statement can be taken as a trick used to simply obtain further incriminating information, and therefore, in my opinion, may be considered dishonest behavior by the Scratch Team.

3. is true and a good point.

andresmh wrote:

4. Some of the swear words were censored. While swear words are part of every day language, using them while requesting to be unblocked from a site is somewhat ironic and certainly does not help the case.

As far as I can see, only one was used, and was only used due to an inability to come up with a better term. Psychological warning is given in advance with the words "to put it simply."

andresmh wrote:

5. From the messages, you can tell this person clearly and explicitly acknowledges to enjoy making fun of other members of the community "they were simply fun to make." This is clearly not the kind of attitude we want to see.

The exact quote from line 36 is: "The comics were formed because they were simply fun to make, really. Their rowdy attitudes bring on a lot of dislike, especially after the way they talk about me right now."
RHY doesn't seem to be saying he enjoys making fun of community members. The quote gives a reason for the comics' creation; RHY seems to be acknowledging enjoyment of drawing the comics because of the artistic practice, not the part that involves mocking others, as implied in the second part of the quote.

andresmh wrote:

6. To top all that, RHY fully acknowledges participation in off site activities intended to harass members of the community and unwillingness to stop.  In general, we make decisions to block accounts mainly on the basis of their interactions on our website, however, once an account has been blocked AND there is full acknowledgement of harassment offsite AND unwillingess to stop, in addition to #1,#2,#3,#4,$5 then makes it very hard for us to accept that person back into our community.

This was covered in point 1. RHY does acknowledge participation, but I do not see where he reflected a personal unwillingness to stop. Line 18 only mentions that the GROUP won't stop simply to allow RHY back into the community, unless the compromise mentioned in argument 1 is reached.
---------------------------------
And that's all I can say on this matter. Some of my opinions may be wrong, but the above is a basic summary on what I believe can be said about this matter, and I hope it is acceptable.

Wow nice job typing that up.

antimonyarsenide wrote:

I think that those messages, and RHY's replies, are subject to some degree of varying interpretation.
Andres's interpretation is reasonable when those messages are used as a standalone source, but from what I know of the parties involved and the events being discussed, I don't think that interpretation really expresses RHY's opinions accurately.

andresmh wrote:

1. As you can see he does not accept to stop violating the TOU.

He says  "I can't make any promises on confrontation with people angry at me because of the (offsite material)" .
Also, when asked "Will you agree to stop?" there was no explicit response to it and instead RHY just request to  "at least visible to users not logged into the website", which we agreed to do.

"I can't make any promises on confrontation with people angry at me because of the (offsite material)" (line 54 on the note) expresses not an unwillingness to stop being respectful, but a lack of certainty in his ability to avoid verbally retaliating against people who attack him because of his previous involvement with the [offsite material].

There was in fact a response to "Will you agree to stop?" in the message; RHY answered on line 18: "The scratchy scratch group will not stop while the community is in a [state the group cannot tolerate]. I personally don't post comics that often[...]"
Personally, I think RHY is saying that he doesn't have control over the actions of the others in the group. Although it's true that he doesn't agree to stop personal involvement in the offsite material, he seems to be seeking for a compromise between his group and the maturity of the Scratch community, therefore waiting for a response from the Scratch Team about that compromise.

andresmh wrote:

2. RHY also acknowledges creating at least one more account and using mechanisms to circumvent a block. Both things are not allowed by the TOU, they are considered dishonest and an attempt at "game the community".

Yes, and as the Scratch Team has already mentioned, this will lengthen RHY's ban. However, on line 68, the scratch team says:
"If what you say matches well enough with what we've seen, we may choose to trust you again and unblock your account."
The word "may" creates a loophole; however, if this loophole is being used for the Team's argument, then the above statement can be taken as a trick used to simply obtain further incriminating information, and therefore, in my opinion, may be considered dishonest behavior by the Scratch Team.

3. is true and a good point.

andresmh wrote:

4. Some of the swear words were censored. While swear words are part of every day language, using them while requesting to be unblocked from a site is somewhat ironic and certainly does not help the case.

As far as I can see, only one was used, and was only used due to an inability to come up with a better term. Psychological warning is given in advance with the words "to put it simply."

andresmh wrote:

5. From the messages, you can tell this person clearly and explicitly acknowledges to enjoy making fun of other members of the community "they were simply fun to make." This is clearly not the kind of attitude we want to see.

The exact quote from line 36 is: "The comics were formed because they were simply fun to make, really. Their rowdy attitudes bring on a lot of dislike, especially after the way they talk about me right now."
RHY doesn't seem to be saying he enjoys making fun of community members. The quote gives a reason for the comics' creation; RHY seems to be acknowledging enjoyment of drawing the comics because of the artistic practice, not the part that involves mocking others, as implied in the second part of the quote.

andresmh wrote:

6. To top all that, RHY fully acknowledges participation in off site activities intended to harass members of the community and unwillingness to stop.  In general, we make decisions to block accounts mainly on the basis of their interactions on our website, however, once an account has been blocked AND there is full acknowledgement of harassment offsite AND unwillingess to stop, in addition to #1,#2,#3,#4,$5 then makes it very hard for us to accept that person back into our community.

This was covered in point 1. RHY does acknowledge participation, but I do not see where he reflected a personal unwillingness to stop. Line 18 only mentions that the GROUP won't stop simply to allow RHY back into the community, unless the compromise mentioned in argument 1 is reached.
---------------------------------
And that's all I can say on this matter. Some of my opinions may be wrong, but the above is a basic summary on what I believe can be said about this matter, and I hope it is acceptable.

Nice novel! XD jk. A very valid arguement... Ill have to re-read the note...

EDIT: After I re-read the note I realized, your entirely right in my opinion. He seems to just not like miscellanious. :\

Last edited by bananaman114 (2010-11-28 19:51:24)

Lightnin wrote:

a lot of words these posts are getting long jegus

dude so your only point is that rhy didnt directly say hed comply even though its strongly implied by "I can't make any promises on confrontation with people angry at me because of the (offsite material), which to be truthful were made by mostly the one known externally as Kaj" because i dunno what you think when you read it but it sounds pretty clear hes trying to say that hell try to be respectful when he can

i mean if you come back to an atmosphere of disrespect from the people you previously disrespected youre definitely going to lose your cool at some point or another

Lightnin wrote:

If you feel that the requirement to promise to be respectful and follow the TOU before being unblocked is unreasonable, you may suggest an alternative.

woah woah dude that parts fine but you yourself said that youre adding other parts to what rhy needs to do
right here:

Lightnin wrote:

In this case we also made it a requirement that Rhy stop participating in offsite activities that were disrespectful of members of the Scratch community.

i mean dude read what rhy is saying
its that he'll participate if everyone else does because obviously if he comes back and is presented with people violating the tou then it should be okay to do the same to them

y'know that golden rule thing

Lightnin wrote:

TuffGhost wrote:

Lightnin wrote:

If you feel that the requirement to promise to be respectful and follow the TOU before being unblocked is unreasonable, you may suggest an alternative.

woah woah dude that parts fine but you yourself said that youre adding other parts to what rhy needs to do
right here:

Lightnin wrote:

In this case we also made it a requirement that Rhy stop participating in offsite activities that were disrespectful of members of the Scratch community.

i mean dude read what rhy is saying
its that he'll participate if everyone else does because obviously if he comes back and is presented with people violating the tou then it should be okay to do the same to them

y'know that golden rule thing

Yep, we added a requirement.

ok thats unfair

Lighnin wrote:

No, it's not okay to go against the TOU when you see others doing it. The TOU does not contain a clause stating that it's ok to be disrespectful if someone else does something disrespectful first.

dude i wasnt saying it would be okay im saying that the whole golden rule thing is just how people work
like if you see someone doing something and not getting punished then obviously it should be ok for you to
but being previously banned you guys have a lower threshold for rhys behavior to block him so you pass off the other users with a warning or sometimes not even while you go straight to banning rhy (again)