About Scratch :: Suggestions :: Improve collaboration

everwinner64 wrote:

For instance, the system could automatically detect and reject empty projects, duplicates, or projects with minimal content (e.g., fewer than X blocks)

Minimal content could be an issue for where it wouldn't be needed - Like a bitmap spriter just collaborating with another, using like 2 blocks for instance.

Only projects that pass this automated check would be forwarded for manual review by ST

This would definitely get more complaints than there already are because of misconceptions.

I realize I didn’t elaborate enough on their distinct purposes:
Reader: This permission allows users to view scripts and project elements without modifying them, and without being able to run the project
Tester: Same permissions than reader, but you can run the project

In that scenario, my apologies.

inviting collaborators for improper purposes or something else could be treated by systems below:
you could need to have a minimum number of published projects, a clean record without major reports, or a history of constructive community engagement
Include a collaborator activity log that records all actions taken within a project. If a problem arises, ST can review this log to understand what happened

None of those things can confirm you won't be doing it - I get the same can be said for the Scratcher role, but we are talking about potentially floodgating a whole queue that would be requiring constant review, unlike cloud variables, but like reports.
That activity log idea isn't half-bad; but it can just be spammed hard if it records all actions and then it'll be a huge waste of time to skim through.

Alongside the activity log, include a streamlined reporting system within collaborative projects. Any collaborator could report problematic behavior or content directly from the project interface

Coughfe wrote:

A creator needs help on a project, he can « share » the project with persons he trusts

If the person in question trusts the other person, then it's also likely backwards, and they may end up not reporting misbehaviour.

everwinner64 wrote:

Implement periodic automated checks on collaborative projects (e.g., scanning recent changes for suspicious behavior or patterns)

That would be just really slow and/or laggy in the backend.