There actually is a connection, I'll explain:
Baphomet complained about scripts doing the same things, scripts devouring valuable resources.
This is an inefficiency that could be solved by standardizing the way in which scripts are conceived, designed, written and documented.
I saw there already is an initiative to bundle library functions, in order to prevent people wasting their time on trivial (but necessary) functions. Why not extend this work, and start from the beginning with a well-designed API?
The result would be some kind of API tree in which editors can look up functions,
reuse the code described in it and extend or modify functions or scripts. It would be
something like the command reference for ofp editing, but then on a level of implemented scripts.
Example: suppose you want to script a parachute drop (or a weapon like mentioned above).
The first thing you would have to do is look up in the API tree wether a similar script already exists. If so, you could check out all parameters and return types for the functions used in the script - the prerequisite is that all scripts are documented in a uniform way - and extend the script by adding some code.
If the extension is good, it can be added to the API tree, so other people can reuse the code
and make another extension and so on. If the script happens to be better than the original one,
the old script can be marked as deprecated, so people stop relying on it and start using the new script as a base for their extensions. If the script is full of flaws - eg. cubic loops - it can be rejected, or published for peole to improve it, In this way inefficiencies in scripts are eliminated and kept track of easier and a certain level of quality in the scripts is guaranteed ... Plus: you can code easier.
The next step would be to create a script-processor, accepting real-life code blocks (for and while loops, synchronization blocks, etc.) and outputting ofp-script. But I think this is not so desirable for all the people out there using the ofp scripting language...