Recent Forum Posts
From categories:
page 1123...next »

In the middle of the night, a janitor is trapped in an old house.

spooking intensifies


"Do it? Dan, I'm not a Republic Serial villain. Do you seriously think I'd explain my master-stroke if there remained the slightest chance of you affecting its outcome? I did it thirty-five minutes ago." - Adrian Veidt

Yeah, I dig the new Scarf letter you wrote up, I found the ending to this new one particularly saddening and fit the tone of the SCP-2991 article very well. The rest of this tale is top-notch too and I'm glad it all turned out great in the end. +1


"Do it? Dan, I'm not a Republic Serial villain. Do you seriously think I'd explain my master-stroke if there remained the slightest chance of you affecting its outcome? I did it thirty-five minutes ago." - Adrian Veidt

by Dr HysteriaDr Hysteria, 05 Aug 2015 09:51

shouldn't authors be able to write about anything related to the Foundation, its technology, procedures, etc…

Yes, absolutely. And the list of rules is pretty short when it comes to posting.

… without having to worry about being downvoted because I don't think that's how the Foundation works?

No. To me, the only thing as sacrosanct as the author's right to post, is the reviewer's right to vote. As the rules state, a vote for any reason is legitimate, provided that reason is based solely on the content of the article. The idea that the content of the article doesn't comply with my headcanon - totally legitimate reason for downvoting. I like consistency, as I feel verisimilitude adds to immersion, and I'm sure that there are others of a similar view.

how important is to comply with readers' canons for the survival of a piece?

Based on the fact that a number of voters will take headcanon into account when voting, clearly it is important. But in my opinion it's only one factor, and not the most important. You don't have to go very far on the site to find comments saying "This is not consistent with my views of the Foundation, but I liked it, so I upvoted." As I said, I am a "headcanon voter", but great writing will tend to overcome those types of objections for me, and I think that is true for many on the site. Quality will out.

Re: To canon or not to canon? by psulpsul, 05 Aug 2015 09:49

When Yggdrasil was mentioned, I immediately thought of The Infinite Loops.

by quantumshardquantumshard, 05 Aug 2015 09:42

People will generally disregard your work if you don't post a link to your sandbox. To create your own sandbox, click here. Once you've created a sandbox, post the link to your sandbox containing your draft in this thread. I don't wanna backseat mod, but you should consider this when creating a thread in the future. Now, onto your draft.

The tonality of your article is just poor overall. To put it into perspective, users will immediately downvote after reading the first sentence. I'm not trying to be harsh, I'm just stating the facts. There's a specific art to writing an SCP article, and tonality is a key factor that no author should ever overlook, as the tone must always be clinical and read like a scientific report. In turn, I advise against describing this computer virus as "sadistic", as it breaks the tone of the article and makes it feel like we're reading some kind of video game character bio.

Not to mention the fact that this was all written without proper spacing between paragraphs, so it just comes out as one big wall of text that it incomprehensible to read and destroys any interest the reader may have had in looking at your article. The idea of some computer virus controlling people, and something to do with torture, is a bland concept that is only really explored in the testing logs, but even they break the tonality so much that I can't take them seriously enough to feel a genuine moment of horror in what I was reading. For the most part I was skimming the article, and I essentially gained the basic jist of it all and where it was exactly going to go and how you were going to execute it.


"Do it? Dan, I'm not a Republic Serial villain. Do you seriously think I'd explain my master-stroke if there remained the slightest chance of you affecting its outcome? I did it thirty-five minutes ago." - Adrian Veidt

Re: The Puppet Master by Dr HysteriaDr Hysteria, 05 Aug 2015 09:41

(I see you're new-ish) What's the best thing you've read on this glorious site in your time here?

@XenonLizard by CetoceanCetocean, 05 Aug 2015 09:35

This sounds all too familiar to the blob. It can be stopped by cold things, and eat people until there's nothing left but bones, and other similarities. It might be plaugarism.

by CuliusJeasarCuliusJeasar, 05 Aug 2015 09:32

Tagalog's my first language (I'm Filipino) and I know a tiny bit of Mandarin because our school teaches it.

Re: @Cetocean by CetoceanCetocean, 05 Aug 2015 09:31

Before I go into why this article doesn't work, I think you need to learn what makes something Keter. The object class of an item determines the level of difficulty and precision needed to contain an anomaly, NOT how dangerous an object is. So when I say that SCP-2030 is Keter, it isn't that class because it killed a few people, it's Keter because no matter how hard the Foundation attempt to track the source and delete traces of its existence from the public conciousness, it will continue to spread and survive.

The same can be said about your anomaly, just because he can kill people, doesn't make him a threat that's hard to contain. Now I don't wanna be lazy and just call this thing SCP-076, but it pretty much is. Right down to the duel swords that have become a laughable cliche in and of itself. The idea of a guy who cycles through an entire lifespan in one day is a pretty neat concept, but I guarantee that it has been written for the site already.

The execution of the idea is hard to read through, as you constantly try to justify why this thing is Euclid and Keter, while thinking that it just refers to the actual level of danger the object possesses. Not only that, but the description of various weapons it wields is just unnecessary to read through and adds nothing to the article except: "LOOK HOW DANGEROUS HE IS!!!!! HE'S GONNA KILL UUUU!!!!!!!". Coupling all this with the fact that it's all displayed in one giant wall of text and it ultimately becomes a pain to read it's entirety.


"Do it? Dan, I'm not a Republic Serial villain. Do you seriously think I'd explain my master-stroke if there remained the slightest chance of you affecting its outcome? I did it thirty-five minutes ago." - Adrian Veidt

Re: All Time In One Day by Dr HysteriaDr Hysteria, 05 Aug 2015 09:22

I find the proposed solution that they don't actually normalize reality but instead merely suppress the reality bender power source

For the record, I'm more or less trying to achieve what dankaar describes, rather than the above.

But I suspect that is rather beside your point. If I understand correctly, the idea of having SRAs suppress "anomalies" rather than "reality benders" just makes your concern a more general one, coming back to the Time-Turner problem of "if this exists, why isn't it always used?"

And if the concern is about the site as a creative writing endeavour, rather than about in-universe logistics, then no amount of in-universe explanifying or justification is going to resolve it.

Which is why I asked whether you thought it would be more acceptable as a Tale. If I follow the logic, the answer would be "no", because if the concern is not to do with canonicity, having this is a Tale (generally less canonical than the mainlist) is not a solution.

ETA: and again, if I'm reading it right, your questions above aren't intended to be answered with clever in-universe reasons, but they are intended to be rhetorical, to show the drawbacks of the approach. Unfortunately people like me always want to try to come up with an explanation that satisfies the in-universe objections, so I can tend to miss the broader point (again, if that is your purpose).

Re: Collecting thoughts by psulpsul, 05 Aug 2015 09:19

As Kalinin and sirpudding have said, their objections go beyond the "canonicity" of SRAs, and to its appropriateness as a literary device in this context. As I broadly generalised above, there is a difference between (a) a reader that doesn't think that SRAs should be used as "anomaly kryptonite" because it stifles creativity; and (b) a reader that thinks this version of SRAs is inconsistent with their preferred interpretation. Those reasons are quite different, but both readers will start reading the SCP more likely to downvote than not.

… and that is absolutely fine. As I'm going to say in your other thread, there are no "acceptable reasons" to vote one way or the other. There is no perfect reader that comes to a piece without any preconceptions or preferences of any kind. The author writes, and then must release control and accept the reader's interpretation and opinion.

Which is why I'm really grateful to everyone on this thread for sharing their views, both positive and negative. Having a chance to engage with potential readers before launching a piece of writing is an immensely valuable opportunity.

Whether I learn from it, of course, is another matter!

Re: Collecting thoughts by psulpsul, 05 Aug 2015 09:04

I stopped reading after the first paragraph, as the tonality of the article ruins any kind of engagement I could've had in your idea. Almost every SCP article is required to adhere to a clinical and scientific tone, no matter the emotional reaction the writer wants to gain from the audience. So when I read a sentence like this:

It is made of a smooth purple metal, and is floating 1.3 meters off the ground.

I immediately switch out of whatever the hell you were trying to convey. Seriously, there is a lot which is wrong with this particular sentence alone, but something that irks me the most is the phrase "smooth purple metal". Most readers will instantly downvote an article for a blunder like this, as it implies that you don't really care about adhering to the specific tonality created for most SCP articles. Now I know that this probably isn't true, but it does show some laziness. I recommend changing the wording to possibly say that the whole thing is constructed from a specific kind of metal and it's colorization is that of purple. That isn't the greatest of improvements, but it does clear up a lot of problems associated with that sentence.

If the Oblongatron's door is closed

Be sure to say "the object", or "SCP-XXXX" when referring to the anomaly. It breaks the tone of the article.

… fish* … *Upon further research…

Do we really need a whole paragraph detailing the copious amount of variables accompanied by SCP-XXXX? It's fairly unnecessary.1


"Do it? Dan, I'm not a Republic Serial villain. Do you seriously think I'd explain my master-stroke if there remained the slightest chance of you affecting its outcome? I did it thirty-five minutes ago." - Adrian Veidt

+1 for using a microwave to contain the thing.

by Sora2455Sora2455, 05 Aug 2015 08:18

This is a fairly bland concept to be honest, we've had a lot of "VINDOWS TO ANOZZER VORLD", and this doesn't really do anything to shake up the concept. You also don't really go into a lot of detail regarding this alien planet, not to mention that fact that researchers wouldn't immediately jump to conclusions and assume it's another planet. I mean if it's entirely based on the person's perspective, and that they just see another world, the Foundation will probably rule it out as a memetic anomaly rather than a portal to a distant planet.

Speaking of distant planets, how exactly can the Foundation prove that it's another planet and exists in our solar system, when it could just be an alternate Earth? I assume that the second option is what you're going for, but then again I need to emphasize that this is an incredibly unoriginal concept that has been done to death. The fact that you mention stuff about spherical objects that secrete random stuff doesn't help, as it feels like your clinging at straws to see if you try to pull some kind of horror from such a stale article. When in reality it comes out as incredibly forced.


"Do it? Dan, I'm not a Republic Serial villain. Do you seriously think I'd explain my master-stroke if there remained the slightest chance of you affecting its outcome? I did it thirty-five minutes ago." - Adrian Veidt

Re: Window by Dr HysteriaDr Hysteria, 05 Aug 2015 07:57

3


Moderator, SCP Wiki
Captain of the Technical Team, member of the Community Outreach Team

Re: Staff Post - Deletion Vote by CrayneCrayne, 05 Aug 2015 07:57

3, Riemann worst mod ever.


Moderator, SCP Wiki
Captain of the Technical Team, member of the Community Outreach Team

Re: Staff Post - Deletion Vote by CrayneCrayne, 05 Aug 2015 07:57

2


Moderator, SCP Wiki
Captain of the Technical Team, member of the Community Outreach Team

Re: Staff Post - Deletion Vote by CrayneCrayne, 05 Aug 2015 07:57

3


Moderator, SCP Wiki
Captain of the Technical Team, member of the Community Outreach Team

Re: Staff Post - Deletion Vote by CrayneCrayne, 05 Aug 2015 07:56

SCP-117 - Complete Multitool

"D-Class with SCP-117 entered 682 enclosure. SCP-117 begins to produce a tool far larger than any tool produced so far - several meters in length at least. However, before even the frame of the tool can be finished, the D-Class expired, having had all metal absorbed into 117. 117 recovered with all haste using attached cord."

On the bright side, 117 thought it was possible to kill 682. Just really hard. - Dr Vauge

by Sora2455Sora2455, 05 Aug 2015 07:56
page 1123...next »
Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License