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

The sheer amount of worldbuilding was so interesting to me that I didn't care at all if it was accurate to how Wikipedia truly does its shit.

+1, well-deserved.

by The PigheadThe Pighead, 19 Mar 2024 11:12

this amazes me all the way through

take your fucking upvote you genius

by GuigGuig, 19 Mar 2024 10:46

Who is a good little bombguin!

Yes you are, you are!

Take this upvote!

by SleazeCinemaEnjoyerSleazeCinemaEnjoyer, 19 Mar 2024 10:37
vxeovvxeov 19 Mar 2024 10:33
in discussion Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions » SCP-8500

translated to cn.

i can die with no regrets now


Saiýnd hier.

by vxeovvxeov, 19 Mar 2024 10:33

I'd say it depends on the universe an article is written in. Some articles have branches that work with all forms of government, and there are some iterations of The Foundation that try to stay absolutely hidden. I say, if your SCP works only in its own Cannon, then you can, or you can base it off other's ideas cannons.

Although I'm not often a fan of the AAs who already have a
Lengthy catalog of
Tales, this is a very fresh reimagining of a frankly
Overused character and
I found it really quite
Delightful.

Character works where we get to explore a
Loser always stand out to me when done well, and you all made a great
Example of making a sad little guy.
Fantastic job, all of you! +1


Something something gonna write scps maybe.

by Anky swallowAnky swallow, 19 Mar 2024 09:57

Hey, I'm Bagel

I've been reading from this site since I was 15. It was one of the only sites at school that was unblocked and was the only reading that held my attention. I have a bunch of ideas in my head already and am excited to see them come to life here!

wow bad author!!! cant beleve the wiki has come to this!!! they got damn "scps" writingers think they can get away with being lazy and forget one of like 50 hyperlinks!!! wiki purge!!!

(/j)

there is at minimum quoted portions of text from the article(s) in question that contain common hallmarks of LLM/AI-generation

I think explicitly describing the heuristic being used by the decision-maker would be better than the presently nebulous "you can tell it's AI because of the way that it is, look at it". The cases with the other surrounding behaviours and especially the change in composition style between post/comments are usually more convincing and the kind of threshold that I'd be after. All I'm figuring is if a discussion thread deserved to exist for the mandatory minimum sentence maybe a thread should exist to determine what that burden of proof should be. Weeklong bans for first infringement on writing that "feels wrong" seems overzealous - there's structure around punishment, there should be as much structure around the assessment of what constitutes rulebreaking

similarly in addition to the excerpts the entire article should be logged verbatim under a collapsible for future reference

How would you recommend motivating authors to write their own material rather than using AI, while balancing the potentially more-demanding ask to reviewers?

the voting module seems to have been pretty effective at kicking AI generated content off the wiki without staff intervention - if there's any examples so far of suspected AI generated content with e.g. more than 20 net upvotes that would be news to me. in practice the heuristic being applied seems mostly of the form "this writing is bad so it must have been AI". reviewers should be able to say "this feels AI generated so I don't want to review it" as an expansion of also being able to say "this writing is so bad I don't want to review it in depth" as separate from any disciplinary processes against the purported author, though it makes perfect sense if it's a pattern of behaviour

Can you provide specific recommendations for these reconsiderations? There isn't really a committee for "ai generation vibe check"

maybe you should explicitly form a committee, or at least a standardised protocol, for the ai generation vibe check. if nothing else, as per the most recent disc threads on AI use, site membership revocation is being used on suspicion of AI generation. if you are confident in the accuracy of the assessment it should be a weeklong ban as per this thread; if you aren't confident then the standard of "suspicion of AI generation may result in revocation of site membership" should have probably come up at some point during this discussion. in recent cases on O5 the explicit weeklong ban on first offense has been de facto replaced with revocation which is counter to the consensus voted on by staff from this thread (and the revocations aren't just a part of a ban as per e.g. here where the user rejoins 2 days later)

so either the mandatory minimum punishment isn't being enforced or the punishment has changed and in either case I feel that warrants further discussion

by DrCarrDrCarr, 19 Mar 2024 09:25

I love Void. I just love it. That Tale wasn't an exception, it was extremely funny.

+1.

by The PigheadThe Pighead, 19 Mar 2024 09:22

Author: MScarletMScarlet
Translator: me
Original Link: 下一站

this tale is an entry in the recent creepypasta contest in cn

by la kanrola kanro, 19 Mar 2024 09:10
KenomaKenoma 19 Mar 2024 08:36
in discussion Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions » SCP-8001

Frieren: Journey's End

+1


𝕎𝕙𝕖𝕟 𝕨𝕒𝕝𝕜𝕚𝕟𝕘 𝕒𝕝𝕠𝕟𝕖 𝕚𝕟 𝕒 𝕛𝕦𝕟𝕘𝕝𝕖 𝕠𝕗 𝕥𝕣𝕦𝕖 𝕕𝕒𝕣𝕜𝕟𝕖𝕤𝕤, 𝕥𝕙𝕖𝕣𝕖 𝕒𝕣𝕖 𝕥𝕙𝕣𝕖𝕖 𝕥𝕙𝕚𝕟𝕘𝕤 𝕥𝕙𝕒𝕥 𝕔𝕒𝕟 𝕤𝕙𝕠𝕨 𝕪𝕠𝕦 𝕥𝕙𝕖 𝕨𝕒𝕪: 𝕚𝕟𝕤𝕥𝕚𝕟𝕔𝕥 𝕥𝕠 𝕤𝕦𝕣𝕧𝕚𝕧𝕖, 𝕥𝕙𝕖 𝕜𝕟𝕠𝕨𝕝𝕖𝕕𝕘𝕖 𝕠𝕗 𝕟𝕒𝕧𝕚𝕘𝕒𝕥𝕚𝕠𝕟, 𝕔𝕣𝕖𝕒𝕥𝕚𝕧𝕖 𝕚𝕞𝕒𝕘𝕚𝕟𝕒𝕥𝕚𝕠𝕟. 𝕎𝕚𝕥𝕙𝕠𝕦𝕥 𝕥𝕙𝕖𝕞, 𝕪𝕠𝕦 𝕒𝕣𝕖 𝕝𝕠𝕤𝕥.

by KenomaKenoma, 19 Mar 2024 08:36

Seeking Greenlights: Yes

Page Type: SCP Article

Genre (Optional): Horror, comedy?

Elevator Pitch: An anomalous bagel appears in a site cafeteria, and it's one and only effect is that anyone that sees it or is told by anyone that also knows about it, in any way, has an intense and irrational fear of this bagel. A fear so great that anyone affected thinks this bagel is the highest possible threat to them, they don't know what it does, but they know it could easily end them and maybe the world. (Even though it won't, it's just a normal bagel)

Central Narrative: The story of this bagel will be from the point of view from a researcher affected by the bagel. They are attempting to write an SCP article on the bagel while under its affects, its written in a rambling/crazy way and the addendums turn into a day by day account of what they are witnessing. That won't be the main article, but just a document inside the SCP article made after the event.

Additional Notes (Optional): It's going to be a neutralized SCP, but with the mysterious nature of how it appeared, could mean that another one could show up. Also, I am currently working on my second draft with 5-6 friends peer reviewing it, I just wanted to go fully through official means since this is my first ever article.

SkeletonInAFridgeSkeletonInAFridge, to better help the author here, can you elaborate? Your current review is rather generic and could essentially apply to any critique thread in this forum, without clear indication of whether you read the material or not. What specifically did you think was interesting about the concept? Why? Do you think any changes need to be made? Why or why not?

For more information on giving critique in this forum, please see this thread: https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/forum/t-9804362/so-you-want-to-be-a-concept-reviewer

Critique Team - Captain Post by ZynZyn, 19 Mar 2024 08:20

I missed this post last month—moving forward, feel free to poke a staff member via PM if there isn't a timely response on something like this.

where the evaluation of the content being AI-generated appears to just be "the vibes were off"

I find that I'm in agreement that more proof should have been recorded for this particular case, as quoted portions or screenshots in the O5 thread. That said,

I'm more just concerned that a Vibe Check Committee with powers to indiscriminately kill any article with Bad Vibes, absent any comment from the author on the use of AI.

For the case linked, the author self-deleted the pages that were reported in IRC before evidence could be recorded. This is noted in the thread, and as such the reason why the user received a warning and no further action.

hey just checking in and confirming that the complete absence of proof in any of the logged and prosecuted examples of AI generated writing on 05command is absolutely bonkers

For all the threads (as far as I'm aware) logging staff responses to AI-generated writing, there is at minimum quoted portions of text from the article(s) in question that contain common hallmarks of LLM/AI-generation. Other proof included in threads that have that additional information for collecting are comparisons between sandbox content and author comments' typing style (for some cases, sandboxes contained pre-AI-revisions of base article text, or the prompts fed into the AI were present). Additionally, some authors will confirm they used AI, such as with this case: https://05command.wikidot.com/forum/t-16748957

If more proof beyond this is needed, can you provide some examples of how to structure posts so they do not appear as just a "vibe check"?

for example:

With regards to the thread linked, there was no response issued beyond a post in the discussion thread of the article asking if the author used AI. I have now moved the thread to the Non-Disc Record forum category, as there was no warning, revoke, or ban associated with the case.

i would not call this 'standard' by any stretch of the imagination

+1 perfectly horrifying

by GuigGuig, 19 Mar 2024 07:43
Re: Book? by HarryBlankHarryBlank, 19 Mar 2024 07:37

Locking this thread as it's presently discontinued. Author, when you would like to resume work on this draft, you may create a new thread.

Admin Post - Info - Closed by ZynZyn, 19 Mar 2024 06:50
page 1123...next »
Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License