Scratch

Ummm... What about a manual upgrade, for the people you know you can trust?

cheddargirl wrote:

But even if there was a measuring stick of who can get posting privileges and who cannot - for this last case, the guilty account had no prior notifications, and from past posts there was no indication it will turn out sour (in fact, a lot of the pasts posts looked rather innocent or helpful). It kind of shows how someone can look to be a trusting account, and then pull off a Jekyll/Hyde moment.

I see your point on this, since it has happened many times. And we have to deal with it, because no one is truly, 100%, trustworthy or truth-filled. Even if they aren't malicious.
So its really hard to determine things such as this.

And rabbit, upgrading manually would take forever with a forum this large. Can you even imagine it? That is definitely not an option. I've been apart of a forum that did this such thing, and it took forever, even with a small community. :\

So it seems as if we have gotten nowhere with this discussion. But I do suppose it would be better to disable, as long as we have no solution, for it enables safety for all ages of the community. 

POKEMON BATTLE!!!
Doooooooooooooooooooododledoodledoodledoo

I wild Troll appeared!

Go! Moderator!

The wild Troll used [img] tags!
It’s super effective!

Moderator used Disable

The wild Troll fainted.

_________________________________________________________________________________

The above is a Pokemon interpretation of what happened earlier.

Last edited by henley (2012-01-03 18:08:26)

Hmm...

Lightnin wrote:

Don't feed the trolls There’s an old saying that goes “It takes two to tango.” It means that for something like trolling to keep going, it needs people to feed the trolls - with angry responses or long threads discussing the issue. As long as the community’s focus is on whatever is inappropriate or controversial, then it is likely to continue.  So please do not post links or have discussions about sites that are inappropriate or disrespectful.  We will remove or close all threads and posts related to these discussions.

Do you realize how you're feeding the trolls by causing a massive reaction and banning IMG tags and creating a 7-page-long topic saying how they're "being careful" about spammers.

WindowsExplorer wrote:

I know most people are upset, but I don't really mind. I know it will be back in a while, and it's not permanent, just until Scratch Team find a solution. Please stop sarcasim like "Oh yea, very fair on the rest of the forum users".

Can anyone else see the post above out of shape and in a different font?

joefarebrother wrote:

how about if you see an innapropriate image  you can flag it and the scratch team/mods can delete it and that image is added to a database that will block that image from being reposted?

Well, the issue here is that the Scratch Team doesn't want kids to see that stuff. They want it to stay safe for the younger kids. 

Some of this topic feels like a one sided flamewar.

PlutoIsHades wrote:

cheddargirl wrote:

PlutoIsHades wrote:

Hmm...

Do you realize how you're feeding the trolls by causing a massive reaction and banning IMG tags and creating a 7-page-long topic saying how they're "being careful" about spammers.

Technically, the massive reactions are kind of on the community's part. So is the length of a topic. The community's negative reaction towards the situation instead of being creative in trying to find a solutions seems to be more of a troll feeding than anything else. 

To not feed the trolls, the better option would be to continue brainstorming ways to better combat situations like this while the temporary image disabling is in place instead of continually complaining about how images are disabled (which really gets us nowhere).

Well, WE weren't the ones who banned the img tag.  That was you guys' freaking-out reaction. 

We ARE trying to come up with solutions.  There are a few out there already that are decent and should be implemented.

The temporary removal of the IMG tags was the same precaution when trolls came over and started spamming on new accounts - they were reinstated back when there was a solution for that problem, the ST is just simply doing the same thing again.

No matter how much you disagree, I don't feel it's an overreaction to the issue but just another precaution like last time a similar incident happened since it's still possible for a similar attack to happen again at anytime, and the site is currently not prepared for it. It's much like how some communities place temporary measures into effect after a major attack or disaster, and then lift them when things are better and when the community has the tools to deal with such situations again. A true overreaction would be if the ST had chosen the same route as had gone with other sites who have experienced the same problems and resulted in links and images have been banned permanently.

Some of the suggestions are good, but there's difficulty implement them, I'd imagine that whatever the ST members on the website design side choose to do, any measures to reduce the chance of an image attack requires changes to the forum software and some more coding, and such things take time to do. Complaining about how IMG tags are currently disabled is not going to get that work done any faster.

I think it's better to at least make do with what we have right now while the image tags are disabled until such a solution comes out. People can still link to images, or can upload images in a Scratch project and link to that if necessary, just to name a few examples of getting around while the temporary disablement of IMG tags is in place.

scimonster wrote:

I wonder if Google has an API for their image SafeSearch... if they do, you could connect to it each time an image was posted (automatically, of course  ), and if it's appropriate, allow it, and if not, remove it from the post. A post with 5 images blocked would be blocked entirely.

In my experience, it hasn't been that safe. ._.

ProgrammingFreak wrote:

joefarebrother wrote:

how about if you see an innapropriate image  you can flag it and the scratch team/mods can delete it and that image is added to a database that will block that image from being reposted?

Well, the issue here is that the Scratch Team doesn't want kids to see that stuff. They want it to stay safe for the younger kids. 

how about parental controls?

joefarebrother wrote:

ProgrammingFreak wrote:

joefarebrother wrote:

how about if you see an innapropriate image  you can flag it and the scratch team/mods can delete it and that image is added to a database that will block that image from being reposted?

Well, the issue here is that the Scratch Team doesn't want kids to see that stuff. They want it to stay safe for the younger kids. 

how about parental controls?

Hmm, perhaps. But I think it would be better to have it safe automatically.

I just want a 3-flag rule. If anything is flagged/reported by 3 users, they'd have a quick little checkbox with something like: "should this be hidden from the community?" If 3 people report/flag and check that box (I want the checkbox because, sometimes, they might just want to move the topic, etc.), the topic/post would be completely censored until a mod approves it, if they choose to approve it.

PaperMario123 wrote:

I just want a 3-flag rule. If anything is flagged/reported by 3 users, they'd have a quick little checkbox with something like: "should this be hidden from the community?" If 3 people report/flag and check that box (I want the checkbox because, sometimes, they might just want to move the topic, etc.), the topic/post would be completely censored until a mod approves it, if they choose to approve it.

Maybe two.
Because it sometimes seems to me that by the time three users come along who know to actually use the report button report the pictures, they have been exposed for a while.