http://www.scp-wiki.net/dr-jekeled
Jekeled has changed his articles. None of them use SEK classification.
We need to decide soon if SEK is something we want to enforce as part of site consistency (which includes things like "Data Expunged" and blackboxing and general SCP format) or not.
Deciding not to enforce this in a timely manner is tantamount to deciding that SEK classification is no longer an enforceable part of site consistency.
Clef
Okay, clarification time.
There are two arguments going here. One is whether or not we want to reopen the question of SEK.
The other is what to do with Jekeled's articles.
Please keep the conversation limited to those two subjects. Not, if you support a new SEK scheme, what it should be, or anything else. Just those two questions: do we reopen the question of SEK, and what do we do in the case of Jekeled?
I do not mind users using other classifications. If it survives or dies by the vote, all the more power to it. I do feel that the way Jekeled did it was a little underhanded, changing the article after it was already positively rated, but nothing I see any need to punish for.
Admin, SCP Wiki
Strongly supporting making it a standard with two caveats:
1. If an article has a legitimate reason not to use SEK, it should not be punished (not liking SEK not being a legitimate reason)
2. We are open to considering reasonable replacements/addition/changes.
e: As for Jekeled's articles, I support either reversion or deletion-then-repost-with-new-class, as discussed in chat.
ee: My wording was not really clear- for the deletion and then repost, I meant that done by Jekeled if he was absolutely dead set on keeping that system.
e3: See post further downthread.
e: As for Jekeled's articles, I support either reversion or deletion-then-repost-with-new-class, as discussed in chat.
I'm sorry, but this little bit is awful.
I find forcing the change down the site's throat equally awful. Ideally, he'd go with the first option.
Why? I don't see this at all.
(For my own explanation, see other post in thread, and feel free to ask for elaboration.)
I do not believe the articles would have the rating they currently have if they originally had that class system upon being posted. In fact, I don't believe they'd still be around at all. As I see it, he's using votes that a different version of the article earned to push something that a large number of people disagree with, well after it is too late for it to have any effect on the article's survival. I find this completely unacceptable.
Why? Are ratings really that sacred for a triviality of format?
I mean this can get real goofy real fast. I mean, shit, people get really mad about lots of trivial changes, such as Bright and others threatening to downvote for "amnestic" (thankfully I don't think many followed through on that) which a number of older articles have legitimized due to retroactive edits. They found that just as enraging as deleting an object class.
It's hard to respect people's inalienable right to mass downvote an article based on a set of nitpicks that changes (sometimes drastically) every 6-12 months.
EDIT: To be clear, this isn't an argument against staff's right to enforce "trivialities of format" if we then see the need. I think that's an important distinction. But we don't delete over that.
I'm not quibbling over a few points. I sincerely believe that the articles would no longer be with us should they have been posted in their present state, and as such, Jekeled's actions are a way of shanghaiing an unpopular system into a place where it can no longer be touched.
e: I'm not saying /we/ delete the article. What I picture it as is we revert it back to SEK, and if that is unacceptable to Jekeled, he may delete them, himself, and repost with the new classes and a clean slate. As much as I loathe what has been done here, I agree that a unilateral deletion on the part of staff is an incredible overreach.
I'm gonna agree with moose here. I really don't like what Jekeled did, but I also don't think he should have to delete and repost his entire skip portfolio just to keep his changes. Yeah, it doesn't go with the rest of the site, yes, it looks weird against the rest of the site, yes, it's in no way matching to any current classification system, but is it really that important? If people dislike the classification enough to downvote based on that rather than the actual merits of the article, well, I guess that's on them.
I also don't like the idea of just changing an author's work. We've been reverting a lot of things as of late (or, to me that's what it seems like), but those are all (unless I missed something) additions to work like Bright's list or the Log of Anomalous Items which are much, much different from reverting something on someone's article. If Jekeled wants to have the classification here, even if we don't like it, well… are we really gonna police this that hard?
I personally don't like what Jekeled has done here, but I also don't want to advocate for strict S/E/K classification. I like the idea of exploring different classifications (like Thaumiel), yet something like this just feels jarring against the rest of the articles on the site. If someone's going to use a non-S/E/K classification, I think they should at least try to keep with the general theme and idea behind the current naming system.
I'm too emotionally compromised to give any coherent recommendation about what to do with Jekeled other than to state for the record that what he did (change existing, high-rated articles to legitimize a completely new paradigm) is extremely underhanded but also a tactic that's been used by staff in the past to do similar things.
What I will say, however, is that without taking a stand on the underlying SEK issue, there's very little any kind of disciplinary action against Jekeled will accomplish other than enraging a lot of site members because up until this point, the lack of staff leadership in article consistency has led to a standing policy of "do whatever you can get away with" and he's basically testing to see what he can get away with. If we want to fix this problem, we have to fix the underlying issue, not just go after individuals.
I will also state for the record that the people who are vehemently against doing anything about this because of the issue of author freedoms are going way overboard. When you signed on to write for the main series of the SCP Wiki, you did so with the knowledge that in order to be a proper SCP article, there are things you need to do to be consistent with the tone and framework of the rest of the site. We explicitly put Safe/Euclid/Keter on the standard template and order newbies to "choose one". That's a fairly strong precedent for consistency enforcement in place.
Edit: Forgive my French, but all of you people who are so blinded by your fear of having someone else dictate what you can or can't do, set down your hubris for a goddamn minute and think about what's best for the site. Do you want to enforce a set of rules that admittedly needs to be and was intended to be overhauled for clarity, or let a select few people blow it all to hell in protest? Most of you admit that the Object Class is the least interesting and least important part of an article. If that's the case, then why not make it consistent across the site where applicable so that newbies have a better user experience? Every single person who contributed to this community did so while understanding that while there's no "canon", there are things that are and should be consistent across the site, else it becomes a complete mess.
I would like to note that, for myself at least, the opposition to standardization is not only an issue of what people deserve, but also of what I think results in good content. I think authors having the ability to mix things up can make for good writing.
One is whether or not we want to reopen the question of SEK.
I assume this is about changing already posted articles to something other than SEK, when the userbase won't re-vote on it, not posting completely new articles with off-palette classifications?
butts
I'm going to briefly recap what I said in SSSC.
Furthermore:
Fact is, there are some major points converging. "The Classification system has been unchanged for quite a while," "There is no canon," and "Votes determine the merits of an article, not staff." Untangling all those things is not something to be taken lightly.
Because I don't like making a strong statement without a possible solution, let me try my hand at both.
For Jekeled, I'll agree with most of O5 that the manner in which he made these changes is the problem. He can revert the changes and keep his vote total, or resubmit them in their original slots with the new classification intact. It makes me cringe that they would be deleted if neither of these options are okay with him.
For the issue going forward, one, it's not much of an issue beyond a couple of users that sincerely dislike SEK. I think SSSC got to hyperventilating a little bit, as though there were "Code Green Banana Scary Man" classifications positively kicking down the door. That's not the case. If the staff are going to get into the business of dictating canon, it needs to be over something really important and I don't think this is the place where we should take that right away from the users. Let them decide with their votes as they always have. In the relevant guides that explain SEK, a short blurb, "You may occasionally see SCP articles that are not listed here; these alternate classification systems are allowed but are not recommended for beginning authors." Any non-standard SEK articles get tagged with "unclassed" or perhaps a new "non-sek" tag.
I'll make another post later if I think of anything else.
To the question of what do we do with Jekeled's articles: I don't mind leaving them alone. I view him as the final author and arbiter of what happens with his pages, and if he decided later he wants the object class to be different, I'm fine with that. People are free to downvote. I'm familiar with the point that for an article with +80 upvotes, it is not immediately practical for everyone who has voted to reevaluate the SCP they voted on previously, but I don't think the author is responsible for this. Basically, I would be bothered by behavior like this if I viewed it as a literal attempt at a bait-and-switch with deceitful or harmful intent, but I don't. It's his page and he changed his mind, and those people who dislike the change have the responsibility to find it and change their vote accordingly.
To the question of reopening the S/E/K discussion: As a yes/no question to "should we start debating this," yes. Clef's post phrases it as though this is how the question should be read, so I'll leave it there. Tl;dr: I'm going to support leaving it an unenforceable part of site convention rather than a rule, with readers having the option of downvoting but without staff interfering with the author's decision. In other words, a general extrapolation of the specific point I made with regards to Jekeled's articles.
I am… not entirely opposed to expanding the SEK system, although I'd like to see it done carefully instead of people willy-nilly tossing out random object classes. The slow introduction/adoption of Thaumiel, for instance. But generally speaking, I'd err on the side of caution and stick with SEK.
That said, I think that we need to revert Jekeled's articles, since he didn't just abandon the SEK system, but actually abandoned the "Object Class" portion of the standard format. And not only that, but he made the changes WELL after they had been popularly upvoted, so people didn't have the opportunity to vote/comment on that when the articles were first posted. And let's be honest: it's well-known that the vast majority of people don't reread articles unless it's one of the massively popular ones.
Giving bearhugs to the unsuspecting since 1872.
+1
I can't say I dislike the proposed system, but this is not the correct way to go about it. And yes, I do think staff, as a whole, have the authority to make and implement changes to the SEK system.
Piffy is an SCP Foundation Moderator, Lv. 9001 Squishy Wizard, and Knight of the Red Pen.
What to do with Jekeled's articles: inb4 someone says expressing an opinion on an article's quality by means of voting on it is malicioussssss I'm going to go downvote them. Those containment levels are terrible.
The S/E/K discussion: As before and as above, I will judge an article with a new classification on how well it fits with the rest of the existing mythos and whether or not the new classification actually adds more than it subtracts.
Users should be allowed to post their articles in whatever format they wish, not solely based on what we prefer. I heavily oppose any effort to change the articles away from what the user has wished they be, as I feel that users should be allowed to experiment with new systems and concepts in their writings as they see fit, and that is unnecessary for the staff of the site to decide what a user can write in this regard.
I do not think any official discussion needs be made regarding whatever system of classification users decide on. If they wish to use a different one, and people like it, that is their business. Let the votes decide.
(account deleted)