Scratch

Chrischb · 2010-08-04 02:53:55

There are larger groups than that out there... hmm

Ace-of-Spades · 2010-08-04 14:18:45

But do we really want the page to be stretched down that much? Maybe if we removed the 'Other Projects by this user' from Collaboration Projects, and turned the Users thing into pages, with 6 to 8 on each page.

PlayWithFire · 2010-08-04 14:52:30

PlayWithFire wrote:
well i think that it could be easily taken care of, if the project is posted a user could get a message saying that they were credited as an author, it would ask something like, are you the co-author of this project? and they could choose yes or no.

they of course wouldn't be credited until they accepted.

this is how it would NOT be abused

yes there are larger groups, perhaps a way for it to support companies? but that would involve making a companies system on the website.

i don't think you're ever really gonna have enough people collaborating to make it more than one page, unless of course you do it with a company. perhaps you could have teh ability to create a scratch company. or they could be called, "collaboration groups" or something like that. these groups would have many users in them who could add their projecst to the group (like a gallery) the main difference would be that it wouldn't be called a gallery and it would be able to be credited as an author and have the members displayed on the side of it.

Ace-of-Spades · 2010-08-04 17:05:54

So then I can just make 50 accounts and have them all accept the Author position. If you were being offered the credit for a project, chances are you would take it. So if I say that there were 500 people in my collaboration and invite them all, chances are at least 200 would select 'Yes.'

PlayWithFire · 2010-08-04 18:18:17

but i don't see why you would do that, as for making 50 accounts, well you could make 50 accounts and post the same project on all of them and that's virtually the same thing.

Ace-of-Spades · 2010-08-04 18:57:01

But if I invite 500 others to do it, and of course people would, we're talking about pranksters here, and a lot of people accept, there'll be a long list of Authors. You might not see why I would do that, but there definitely will be someone.

PlayWithFire · 2010-08-04 19:11:44

alright, then limit it.

Ace-of-Spades · 2010-08-04 22:23:11

To what?

PlayWithFire · 2010-08-05 02:24:32

hmm, i'd say your suggestion of 6 was good.

Ace-of-Spades · 2010-08-05 23:08:11

If it's with pages, with 8 each, then there could be large groups and not stretch the page. It's unusual for there to be more than 8 people in a collaboration so even if no one wouldn't normally go to the second page of authors, they wouldn't be a second page because there's less than 8 people in a collaboration. In the rare case that it is a large team collaboration, the project would probably be really good and people would want to know all of the authors.

But project notes would get pushed down in any case...

PlayWithFire · 2010-08-17 02:48:35

okay

Scratch

archived forums

#26 2010-08-04 02:53:55

Re: more versatility with the website! - collaborations!

#27 2010-08-04 14:18:45

Re: more versatility with the website! - collaborations!

#28 2010-08-04 14:52:30

Re: more versatility with the website! - collaborations!

PlayWithFire wrote:

#29 2010-08-04 17:05:54

Re: more versatility with the website! - collaborations!

#30 2010-08-04 18:18:17

Re: more versatility with the website! - collaborations!

#31 2010-08-04 18:57:01

Re: more versatility with the website! - collaborations!

#32 2010-08-04 19:11:44

Re: more versatility with the website! - collaborations!

#33 2010-08-04 22:23:11

Re: more versatility with the website! - collaborations!

#34 2010-08-05 02:24:32

Re: more versatility with the website! - collaborations!

#35 2010-08-05 23:08:11

Re: more versatility with the website! - collaborations!

#36 2010-08-17 02:48:35

Re: more versatility with the website! - collaborations!

Board footer