This doesn't seem nearly dangerous enough to warrant Keter classification, since current containment seems to be adequate… as is, though, it's pretty much 682-lite… thoughts?
Date: 27 Jul 2008 06:24
Number of posts: 28
RSS: New posts
Adequate, yes, but hardly a permanent solution. Given the danger it represents I think Keter is appropriate.
It is rather similar to SCP-682 in concept, though. And exactly how much more severe can reprimands get beyond revocation of security clearance? D-level is as low as it gets.
I wanna decom this, can I decom this? :3
I'm up for this! We haven't had a good old decom in a while.
Sounds like fun, I think. Lemme see what will properly hurt it…
Run this by as a testing idea:
Use SCP-294 to produce a cup of SCP-096's coolant.
Damage SCP-517 to coma levels.
Inject coolant into central nervous system, and may also opt to inject into cardiopulmonary system as well.
At that point, we can either leave it frozen or render it down into parts for disposal.
I'm pretty sure this was one of the first two or three SCP's I read, if not -the- first. I'd be pretty sad to see this guy go too … but honestly, looking at this guy objectively, if he were a new article he'd be deleted pretty quick. Big hulk-like animal amalgamation guy that hates everything? We've got 682 for that. And tacking anything else on would just feel derivative.
Still planning to do something with this, Ghost?
I recommend deleting or -ARCing this article.
I'm in favor of -ARCing.
When was our last decom, anyway?
We had a couple decommed from the Mass Edit, but they weren't well publicized, apparently.
Admin, SCP Wiki
I had talked to Ghost at one point about writing a decom article for 851, but I never got around to it and so it just got deleted.
Not that I suggest decoms should exist purely as a means to get stories out of them, but you know! Ducks should go for it…
SCP-076 was allowed entry into SCP-517's containment chamber. Please see Addendum 076-06."
I realize at this point this entry has been archived and discussion is more than a year dead, but I was just curious about this. I can't seem to find any such addendum 076-06 and have an interest in reading it, if it exists.
It was in the SCP-076 article (see that article's 31th and prior revisions).