Type of Fiat: Acclaim

Context: Given the admission of new evidence into the wackdog Demotion Thread, we believe an extension is necessary.

Description: Due to new evidence being submitted outside of Disc channels to the case, we admins believe that an extension of the discussion is in order. Three days (72 hours) is the recommended extension.

Reasoning: Allow all parties to review all submitted evidence and make their decision accordingly.

Supporters:

• Uncle Nicolini
• stormbreath
• AriadnesThread
• Kufat

Dissenters:
None

Timer:

Type of Fiat: Red Tape, Acclaim

Context: Given the ongoing situation with the V/H/S SCP Foundation Film and related matters, close cooperation with the Internet Outreach Team (which manages social media communications) is crucial.

Description: This fiat gives staff member pr0m37h3um, captain of Internet Outreach, temporary mod tools access, on O5 only, for the duration of this incident. This will enable better coordination of this important matter on our staff site.

Reasoning: At the time this fiat was being discussed pr0m37h3um did not have mod tools access. This inhibited her ability to perform relevant functions on O5 Command as part of our coordination in response to this matter. (Further details are available to operational staff.)

Supporters:

• aismallard
• AriadnesThread
• Prismal
• Kufat
• DrEverettMann
• HarryBlank

Dissenters:
None

Timer:

Review:
Rule of Three passed (no objections)

Type of Fiat: Emergency/Red Tape

Description: Allow AHT to remove an individual from staff, without banning them. AHT having this power is ambiguous, with senior team members disagreeing whether on policy allows for this. If AHT does not have the power to do so, removal from staff would need to be handled by Disciplinary through the Demotions section of the charter. This fiat cuts through the red tape of determining whether it is the case and the potential to pass policy, and allows the Anti Harassment Team to do so in this instance.

Reasoning: There is no need to expose the Disciplinary Team to the evidence gathered for the Anti Harassment Team, and to have Disciplinary take action to remove the individual from staff without them having proper context would be inadequate.

Supporters:

• Uncle Nicolini
• stormbreath
• AriadnesThread
• DrEverettMann
• aismallard

Timer:

Type of Fiat: Other

Context: Reservation of a specific slot during the release of the Lost Series.

Description: This fiat is for the reservation of slot 173 in the Lost Series.

Reasoning: Details TBA.

Supporters:
DrEverettMann
DrBleep
Prismal
Kufat
Stormbreath
Dexanote

Dissenters:
None

Review Timer:

Type of Fiat: Red Tape

Context: A prior fiat (link) made to allow those working on the Bright Works Project to modify works contributed to, but not authored, by Bright is unintentionally restrictive in the method of modification, specifying "remove material added by Bright" .

This technically strictly allows *only* for *removal* of the specific content Bright added, which does not allow:

- reverting a work modified by Bright to a version without their modifications.
- re-adding content removed by Bright.
- editing content added/removed or otherwise edited by Bright.

Description: This admin fiat is intended to allow for additional methods of altering works Bright contributed to. This fiat will not be used to counter the previous fiat but rather to expand on the powers granted by said prior fiat.

The Bright Works Project team may, as needed, revise edits made by Bright on pages controlled by users inactive since April 13th 2021 who are not known to be in contact with staff.

All other users controlling pages modified by Bright will be contacted, as able, if the team identifies a necessary revision of Bright's modifications on said user's page.

Administrators may revert or otherwise alter any of these edits upon consensus of at least three active administrators.

Reasoning: When countering Bright's contributions to the SCP Wiki, we want to be minimally disruptive of works we must modify. The more tools we allow the use of, the easier it is for us to seamlessly make said edits.

The line about admins being able to revert or modify allows for an administrative review of edited content without slowing down the Bright Works Project.

Supporters: Kufat, DrBleep, stormbreath, Dr. Mann, Pedagon, Dexanote, ariadnesthread,

Dissenters:

Timer:

Review: Pending

Type of Fiat: Red Tape

Context: Banned users may not normally request edits or deletion of their work. However, many of them have material that showcases the works of the Author TheDuckMan, aka Bright.

Description: This fiat is for the following, to be carried out as requested of staff:

Any banned user may request that references to Bright be removed from their work. Staff will determine whether or not this should take the form of deletion or edits to the work in question; the user may let staff know their preference, but staff will be the final arbiter on what is reasonable for a given page.

Reasoning: Due to the nature of Bright's actions, which in many cases came to light after individuals were banned, it seems unconscionable to not remove it when requested. However, we do not want this to be abused by bad actors in order to force "spite deletions" or allow banned users to freely add new material on the site.

Supporters:
DrEverettMann
DrBleep
AriadnesThread
Kufat
Stormbreath
Dexanote

Dissenters:
None

Review Timer:

Type of Fiat: Red Tape

Context: The Bright Works Project is removing content introduced by Bright into pages created by other authors. Many of the authors are no longer active on the wiki.

Description: This fiat is for the following, to be carried out by the Bright Works Team over the next few weeks:

For non-spelling and grammar edits made by Bright in other articles that have not been actioned, and are not in pages controlled by staff, the Bright Works Project team will identify pages controlled by users who have not been active on the site since April 13th, 2021 (five years prior to the current date) and are not known to be in contact with staff. For those pages, staff will remove material added by Bright.

For users who have been active since then, or whom staff are in contact with, the Bright Works Project Team will attempt to message them through Wikidot (or other means if it is known that is preferred). If they do not respond within two weeks of the message, the team will feel free to remove these changes.

In any case, authors who control these pages are free to revert the changes made as they see fit. This will be communicated to authors who are contacted, and will also be emphasized in messages posted in the discussions for affected pages.

Reasoning: Authors who have been absent for greater than five years are unlikely to be reachable. Even those who have been active more recently may not actually be watching their wikidot accounts any longer.

Supporters:
DrEverettMann
DrBleep
AriadnesThread
Kufat

Dissenters:
None

Review Timer:

Type of Fiat: Red Tape

Context: User AriadnesThread took an extended leave from administrative staff and has recently indicated that she wishes to return to duties. It was decided that an admin fiat be enacted to allow her to return to full Administrator duties. During discussion of her return, it was decided that it was unnecessary for Ari to return to Operational staff and pass through the usual staff promotion process.

Description: This fiat is for the following, to be carried out immediately: return of AriadnesThread to staff duties and the Administrator role.

Reasoning: While the text of our guidelines governing return-to-staff dictate that returning members are to return as Operational Staff level, the intention for administrators specifically was that they may take temporary leave of staff duties at any point and still be permitted to return to the Administrator role when ready. Administrator level in our structure does not automatically confer greater responsibility or power; on an intended level, it is a position conferred to staff who possess specific knowledge or skills to best contribute to the staff body. On a practical level, the "Administrator" wiki role does permit one the capacity to materially affect the wiki through deletions, page locks, user revokes, et cetera, and those tools are only conferred to staff who have gained the trust of the team.

Therefore, Ari's leave of absence included a full removal of her from the admin team, including the Administrator Wikidot role. At the time it was not entirely clear if she would wish to return by the time her leave of absence ended, so we decided to return to that topic when the time came.

Supporters:

• DrEverettMann
• Uncle Nicolini
• ROUNDERHOUSE
• Dexanote
• DrBleep
• thedeadlymoose
• HarryBlank
• Kufat

Dissenters:

• Prismal

Timer:

Type of Fiat: Red Tape/Acclaim

Context: The Bright Works Project is now culminating; staff are discussing the few elements of the Remove and Counter Bright's Influence Proposal which were necessarily only recommendations, with options, when it was proposed. There are elements which have widespread staff consensus and are simple to execute, however, and after discussion with the team and admins we are going to implement these first.

Description: This fiat is for the following, to be carried out immediately:

• Unlisting from the SCP Wiki the pages named on the proposal's Deleted and Recycled Pages list as per the proposal, leaving only pages requiring special handling which have already been blanked and disclaimered, and will be addressed by the remainder of the proposal;
• Creating staff placeholders in the blank SCP slots for recycling and removal per the proposal (tale URLs will not be placeholdered);
• Creating staff placeholders for The Self Insert and Bright's author page, to be redirected to the updated Bright note as part of the proposal;
• Altering the co-author credit on SCP-902 to TheDuckMan, ahead of that article's potential replacement by the other author;
• Altering all metadata on the remaining pages to TheDuckMan;
• Reattributing the SCP-2000 Contest Hub to staff.

The unlisting process is tantamount to deletion but allows staff to retain access to version history, metadata and comments in the event that this information is required in the future.

This reduces the author's page count to eight; staff will then be free to determine the final implementation details for the remaining pages.

This is the first step. We will be proceeding through the remaining action items as quickly and efficiently as possible.

Reasoning: There is no need to delay on unlisting the given pages, as there is staff consensus on how to handle the bulk of the proposal; this will not interfere with the remainder of the process, so there is no reason not to resolve it as soon as possible.

Supporters:

• Queerious
• Harryblank
• Stormbreath
• Kufat
• Dexanote
• ROUNDERHOUSE
• aismallard

Dissenters:

Type of Fiat: Red Tape

Context: As per the process outlined here, staff are to blank Bright's most harming articles, however, an oversight occurred which resulted in the composition of writing the page blanking message's CSS, enabling the possibility of rendering the pages non-votable, and therefore, non-deletable by vote. This is obviously, not wanted nor intended.

Description: This fiat aims to allow staff to carry out the blanking of the pages without requiring another vote, as was intended by the initial vote.

Reasoning: Harm reduction and preventing the need to carry out another vote.

Supporters:

• Uncle Nicolini
• DrEverettMann
• Prismal
• Queerious

Type of Fiat: Red Tape/Acclaim

Context: As we all know, we have been embroiled in the Bright Works Project for too long now, but are close to coming to a decision. In the meantime, a staff vote was held to determine what to do with Bright's most inherently harmful works. After 24 hours of voting, staff have reached quorum at 36 Aye, 1 Nay to blank all of the works mentioned in the thread.

Description: The fiat would carry out the blanking of what have been deemed to be Bright's most inherently harmful works ahead of the timer's end date. Do note that in the event that the Minimal Staff Intervention policy is elected to be implemented, staff will be able to revert these changes as blanking the pages will redirect to a message that has been written by members of staff for now.

Reasoning: Harm reduction.

Supporters:

• Uncle Nicolini
• aismallard
• Kufat
• Queerious
• DrEverettMann
• Dexanote

Dissenters:

• Prismal

Type of Fiat Acclaim

Description: We are introducing the following CSS onto /nav:side. This applies the CSS on all pages on the wiki, without putting the change into Sigma-10, to avoid overreach towards other branches that fork their CSS from ours.

a[href*="user:info/adminbright"] { font-size: 0; } a[href*="user:info/adminbright"]::before { content: 'TheDuckMan'; font-size: .95rem; } a[href*="user:info/adminbright"]:nth-child(1) img { display: none } a[href*="user:info/adminbright"]:nth-child(1)::before { content: ""; width: 16px; height: 16px; background-image: url(https://www.wikidot.com/avatar.php?userid=1522769&size=small&timestamp=1769563918), url(https://www.wikidot.com/userkarma.php?u=634139); display: inline-block; background-size: contain; vertical-align: -0.3em; padding: 1px 9px 1px 8px; background-repeat: no-repeat; background-position-x: 9px, 0; }

Reasoning: An AHT-banned user has a username which implies a position on the site that they do not have. As they are AHT banned, we do not expect them to change their username but need to change how they are presented. This also removes their profile picture to further limit visibility.

Supporters: stormbreath, aismallard, DrBleep, Dexanote, Dr Mann, Queerious, Kufat, Pedagon, nico

Type of Fiat: Red Tape/Rules Amendment

Context: Currently, the site charter does not define the ability for a team captain to adjust the membership of their team independently, nor is the rank of vice captain codified anywhere. Given these are standard functions of staff teams, amending the charter to match is required.

Description: The fiat would apply to the IV. Staff Rights and Rules section of the charter, under A. Staff Teams, adding an additional bullet point. This rule amendment would read:

2. Team structure and membership is determined by the team captain; this includes the authority to add or remove team members from said staff team. A captain additionally has the authority to create, appoint and remove vice captain(s) within their staff teams, and may define their responsibilities and purviews accordingly. In the event a team captain is unavailable, a vice captain will serve as the acting captain; due to this, all vice captain appointees must be operational staff or higher.

Reasoning: Teams and team captains have operated with this as the implicit policy for years - this amendment addresses an oversight in policy, where the only mention of team structure is under the staff structure FAQ, which states:

The responsibility for a team’s goals lies with the team captain(s). However, many team captains still create a formal ranking structure within their team.

Therefore, we need to adjust our charter to formally empower team captains to make these changes.

Supporters:

• Queerious
• Ariadnesthread
• Uncle Nicolini
• Bluesoul
• DrBleep
• Dexanote
• Zyn
• aismallard
• Kufat

Dissenters:

Timer:

Review:
Upon conclusion of the timer this section should note if the fiat has passed review, the number of active admin reviewers, the number of active admin supporters and the number of active admin dissenters

Type of Fiat Other and/or Procedural Stoppage

Context: Prismal found a wording ambiguity in a rule that's up for vote.

Description: Resume discussion for another week to address this issue.

Reasoning: Passing a rule known to be ambiguously-worded is not a desirable outcome.

Supporters: Dr. Mann, Prismal, Uncle Nicolini, stormbreath (in addition to myself.)

Dissenters: None at this time

Timer:

Review
Upon conclusion of the timer this section should note if the fiat has passed review, the number of active admin reviewers, the number of active admin supporters and the number of active admin dissenters

Context: The current Licensing Guide outlines specific rules for the development of video games that are derived from the SCP Wiki. The listed rules are overly restrictive, and many of the largest current games based on the SCP Wiki do not comply with the license as written — notably, the current rules prevent the usage of any major Game Development Engine, presenting a major blocker to aspiring developers. As well, when contacted with questions regarding the current policy, Licensing staff is unable to give a solid answer, due to the non-enforceability of the current policy, without potentially providing information that is legally correct, but contradicts the policy.

The proposed changes to the Licensing Guide would change from a prescriptive stance, to instead noting that we cannot give detailed legal advice, to avoid any liability. Additionally, we have created a set of internal games licensing guidelines that, although they are not legal advice, outline a set of best practices for complying with our license. If these guidelines are followed, we can consider a game as having made a 'good-faith attempt' to follow our license, and would be provided upon specific inquiry/request.

Description: The current Licensing Guide states, as it relates to all games derived from the SCP Wiki:

[The developer must release] the work under CC-by-SA-3.0, including the release statement prominently on any store page the game is distributed on (as well as developer websites and the like), releasing the game without DRM if the game costs money (steam and the like have developer options for this), not imposing additional legal restrictions through EULAs or equivalent user forms, and not attempting to impede any alternate distribution sources so long as those sources in turn follow the terms of the license.

Due to the fact that many popular game engines cannot be released under this license, and the fact that the policy as written does not allow for any games that are not entirely CC-by-SA-3.0, all popular SCP games are in violation of the current policy. Given the fact that we do not have the legal ground, nor the resources to pursue those projects, and the fact that they are considered a positive for the community at large, this policy is unenforced.

As such, to create a policy where we can advise game developers on the best ways to remain compliant, we propose the following:

1. We change the Licensing Guide's language to state the following:

2. We host a page on O5, for internal use, outlining the best practices a game developer can take, to stay compliant with the Wiki's license. This page does not constitute legal advice, and is stated outright at the top. The page will be provided to game developers on request, and subject to complying with the outlined suggestions, a game will be considered as a 'good faith attempt' to follow the Wiki's license, and licensing team will not pursue any corrections. In instances where a video game does not properly attribute the wiki, the Licensing team will be able to contact the developers regarding the issue, as with any other derived content. The contents of this internal page are listed below:
https://05command.wikidot.com/games-licensing-guidelines

Supporters:

• Uncle Nicolini
• DrBleep
• Dexanote
• Rounderhouse
• Prismal
• AriadnesThread

Context: Several slots were frozen in the fiat "Fiat - Freezing Slots".

Description: All non-SCP slots frozen in the aforementioned fiat are to be unfrozen and their placeholder pages removed.

The specific list of pages affected are as follows:

• /guiser-s-night
• /i-autarch
• /lana-neal-sings-the-blues
• /pseudohistorical-mischief
• /strangers-of-site-17
• /strangers-of-site-17-part-two
• /strangers-of-site-17-part-three
• /metacritique-one
• /kalinins-proposal
• /harbinger
• /scp001-kln
• /continued-deliberations
• /a-night-at-the-movies
• /dream-report-990-1
• /after-action-2272
• /dream-report-990-2
• /the-man-at-the-threshold
• /house-of-jacinta

Reasoning: As none of the pages above fall in an SCP series, they are not valuable or meaningful enough to freeze while we determine a larger slot management policy. As such, we should free these pages.

Supporters:

• DrBleep
• Prismal
• stormbreath
• HarryBlank
• Uncle Nicolini

Type of Fiat: Emergency

Context: The Anti-Harassment Team was alerted to the behavior of Nonacherontia. After investigation they were found to be have violated the following sections of the Anti-Harassment policy: Deliberate intimidation. Long-term patterns of consistently manipulative or abusive interpersonal behavior within the SCP Foundation Community. After deliberation, AHT has elected to issue a permanent ban. On 2025-3-15, the Anti-Harassment Team has discovered that the user currently has an alt under the name Yeraven, and has permanently banned that account as well.

Description: Emergency summary deletion of the tale https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/your-first-last-day and https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-8588

Reasoning: Works posted by an previously banned user via sockpuppet account. Tale was also placed in the canon of one of the user's harassment targets in an effort to continue said harassment.

Supporters: AriadnesThread, Prismal, Dexanote, DrEverettMann, HarryBlank, Zyn.

This fiat was approved by

AriadnesThread
Dexanote
DrEverettMann
Prismal
stormbreath
Uncle Nicolini

Type of Fiat: Red Tape

Context and Reasoning: Shortly after the Bright article discussion thread was posted by Naepic, staff began discussing another significant matter. Even if there were no other matters going on, the Bright discussion would by itself be a crucial issue to be thoroughly discussed by staff — but as it is now our attention is spread pretty thin. Additionally, there are multiple staff members who are actively working on various proposals or responses to address this situation. Yet as it is, the timer for the discussion thread is set to expire later today (2025/01/14).

Description: This fiat contains two parts, an action and an official recommendation:

The timer on the discussion thread Deleting Bright's articles is to be extended for another two weeks, until 2025/01/28.

Additionally, administration would like to note the significance of this issue and the need for staff to carefully discuss and come to a consensus before taking action. Along with the timer extension, we recommend the following:

1. Discussion continues on the first thread.
2. Following expiration, the primary ideas and concepts raised in this thread are gathered and made into a second discussion thread, with the goal of refining it into an option or series of options that most staff think are reasonable. If necessary, multiple rounds of discussion threads can be made.
3. After a consensus has been reached, a voting thread can be put up to decide on a final, specific outcome.

Supporters:

• Dexanote
• Pedagon
• stormbreath
• DrBleep
• Uncle Nicolini
• thedeadlymoose (advisory opinion only)

Dissenters:

• None

Kalinin

Until another fiat reverses this freeze, or staff passes policy to address this situation or to reverse this freeze, all of the following slots will be frozen, meaning no new articles can be posted into them:

• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-186
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-255
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-356
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-480
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-518
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-736
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-986
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-1097
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-1166
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-1229
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-1377
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-1484
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-1538
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-1659
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-1840
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-1984
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-2003
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-2188
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-2275
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-2888
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/faith-of-the-foundation
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/guiser-s-night
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/i-autarch
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/lana-neal-sings-the-blues
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/pseudohistorical-mischief
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/strangers-of-site-17
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/strangers-of-site-17-part-two
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/strangers-of-site-17-part-three
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/metacritique-one
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/kalinins-proposal
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/harbinger
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp001-kln
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/continued-deliberations
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/a-night-at-the-movies
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/dream-report-990-1
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/after-action-2272
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/dream-report-990-2
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/the-man-at-the-threshold
• https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/house-of-jacinta

This fiat was approved by:
Prismal
aismallard
Pedagon
Uncle Nicolini
DrBleep
stormbreath
Rounderhouse