iluvwhiskers wrote:

jromagnoli wrote:

legogrl502 wrote:

I do not support inter-shop order completions because it is the duty of each shop to complete its own orders. If you want to take another shop's order, then join the shop. This will make orders less important to the shops. After all, each shop is specifically designed to take requests with just its staff and complete it for the scratcher. It will take emphasis off of ordering and shop advertising because it would be better to just find a shop that specializes in what you need than asking so many people. This scratcher chose a specific shop to go to when they could've gone to any other shop.

This, but I feel like shops could share premade items.

You have a good point, I agree with you jromagnoli.

MasterOfTheTiger wrote:

iluvwhiskers wrote:

jromagnoli wrote:

legogrl502 wrote:

I do not support inter-shop order completions because it is the duty of each shop to complete its own orders. If you want to take another shop's order, then join the shop. This will make orders less important to the shops. After all, each shop is specifically designed to take requests with just its staff and complete it for the scratcher. It will take emphasis off of ordering and shop advertising because it would be better to just find a shop that specializes in what you need than asking so many people. This scratcher chose a specific shop to go to when they could've gone to any other shop.

This, but I feel like shops could share premade items.

You have a good point, I agree with you jromagnoli.

I agree as well. It makes a lot of sense.

Shops receive orders. Many of them are taken real quick, while others take a little while, and some are just passed by continuously, and slide through the pages, but that isn't where the service comes in. After a few requirements are met, those neglected orders will be added to a list found here at this topic, or another official USS topic, and be open to completion by individuals from shops under the USS. This allows only neglected orders to be routinely completed in the background, while in the foreground, the individual shops are still doing their job. If somehow shops still do not want this, they can opt out completely.

• Not claimed by anybody, if claimed already, must have been dropped.
  
• Must be at least 28 days old.

jromagnoli wrote:

Approve.

CutieCow17 wrote:

Approve

legogrl502 wrote:

Approve.

-rose-ice- wrote:

hey, is my art good for a 10 yr old?

-rose-ice- wrote:

Can anyone look at this?: https://scratch-mit-edu.ezproxy.canberra.edu.au/discuss/topic/250935/ thx

Wheatly_Scratcher wrote:

Sorry if I am bugging you, but I own a shop and work at another one. Will I still be accepted?

Wheatly_Scratcher wrote:

Sorry if I am bugging you, but I own a shop and work at another one. Will I still be accepted?

jromagnoli wrote:

IIRC, you were accepted?

Austinato wrote:

<boring stuff>

jromagnoli wrote:

IIRC, you were accepted?

Actually, since they applied in the middle of the proposition process, and I told them the application approval will be delayed up to today. Unfortunately, the voting has started and they will be officially listed members when the vote ends.

iluvwhiskers wrote:

Definitely approve. Having experience from having to wait MONTHS for one order to be taken from a shop really made my vote final. I feel that this will improve shops VERY VERY positively.

snowgryphon wrote:

uhum… i agree?

MasterOfTheTiger wrote:

I approve of the new proposal.

stryer21 wrote:

Approve

iluvwhiskers wrote:

Definitely approve. Having experience from having to wait MONTHS for one order to be taken from a shop really made my vote final. I feel that this will improve shops VERY VERY positively.