Recent Forum Posts
From categories:
page »

Noting that DJX92DJX92 has five failed applications:


Hello! im DJX, i found out about the SCP Foundation by youtube videos and id like to be a member because i want to write SCP's so someone else can see my work.


P. A. S. S. W. O. R. D.




[outdated passcode]


[a different outdated passcode, copy-pasted twice]

Re: Applications Maturity Ban Log by ZynZyn, 30 Sep 2023 07:47

New replies received:

I wont lie I did not know it was racist I thought the guy was just posting gibberish because I had found like three others that was gibberish like it just meant nothing I even ran it through google translate I really did not know that It was racist that Is 100% my bad also I found it just on the front page of general

Well yes but it was not racist I was really just trying to promote my story which is probably still not good but I was in no way being racist or promoting racism

Given this, I personally believe that a ban should remain, given that the action still amounts to spam and maturity. That said, I would be open to decreasing the severity of the ban.

Agreeing with lifting the ban, given information provided.

Ban record has been cleared. User has been PMed regarding the accepted appeal.

Re: Disciplinary - Vizlox by ZynZyn, 30 Sep 2023 07:09
Re: Disciplinary - Vizlox by PrismalPrismal, 29 Sep 2023 23:58

I support removing the ban in light of this new information.

The user made an appeal, detailing their communications with the founder of the "White Front PH" site and, in my view, made a good argument that they:

  • Were originally contributing limited technical changes to a new RPC language branch.
  • That they were not involved in the site since, and unaware of the rebranding and later offensive material added.
  • Were removed from the site (presumably by Kleist) before they were aware of the rebranding, so they thought the site was deleted.

See disciplinary chat for further discussion.

Given this, the main issue with the user is with their RPC affiliation. But as we do not presently ban for membership only, I think that given the circumstances we would need to lift the ban at this time.

Re: Disciplinary - Vizlox by aismallardaismallard, 29 Sep 2023 23:33
Re: NAe-FK
NaepicNaepic 29 Sep 2023 21:02
in discussion Staff Updates / Staff Updates » NAe-FK

Returned a little early

Re: NAe-FK by NaepicNaepic, 29 Sep 2023 21:02

I've PMed the user with details and asked them for clarification as to how they found the old thread, and why they replied to it.

Noting that Dr Williams BrownDr Williams Brown has four failed applications:


Hello, you can call me whatever you wish, but I prefer [name removed] I found this site through a group of friends who talked highly of it. I came to this site mainly to read interesting things +spare time.


GUYS PLEASE STOP DECLINE ME PLEASE I ONLY WANNA JOIN I will not violate any of the site's guidelines I don't know the reason for the rejection. I hope you will make me a member please.


I tried… I lost That my last chance I want to reads scp and write scp and make interesting things… Stop decline me At least tell me the reason…


Hello I wanna join the scp foundation site for reading and writing and talk with some Friends.

Re: Applications Maturity Ban Log by ZynZyn, 29 Sep 2023 07:13

I got a PM response:

I can tell you now that I said no such thing and that you have been misinformed and I would appreciate if you looked into these claims further I have never and will never post anything that discriminates against anyone for something they can not control. Now I do understand that this is not a good look for me seeing how I have already been reported (Falsely I must add) within less than a week of me joining but I do hope that you will look into these reports and promise that you will see that they are baseless and untrue. I would much appreciate help clearing my name.

I linked them to their wikidot profile, where the thread appears.

ETA: of note, it was brought to attention that the user in question did not create the thread, which was originally posted in 2021 by a recurring troll/vandalizer. The user's post included the text, "I actually 100% agree with you there that is infact staight truths you do be speekin […]" followed by a link to a coldposted page.

This seems like a weaker version of the "my brother did it" excuse. If we take this as their appeal then I think we should decline it.

noting that i received a pm from the user similar to the one Zyn received after sending them a deletion pm of an article, screenshot included below.

i have not replied.

I acknowledge and understan that you're hurting. I was hesitant to reply to this further, given that this is meant to be the gee0765 Censure thread and not the Mars Exoneration Thread or the The Spider Queen Defense Thread, and that further developments are ongoing. However, I believe that the following statement absolutely cannot be allowed to stand unclarified and unquestioned:

Furthermore, nobody wanted to say anything when I was dating another user that was 19/20 while I was 15/16. I can tell you it was more than common knowledge to everyone in the community at that time, having it in my creative writing and talking about it in IRC and community Discords. Especially with multiple staff members at the time commenting how cute it was in multiple places. Nobody wanted to call him a pedophile. Nobody wanted to scrutinize our relationship. Nobody demanded that I leave him. Not even when we were so painfully public about our relationship, more so than Mars and I currently are. Nobody wanted to demand him and I cleared the relationship in the eyes of random users that neither of us are friends with with no real say. When that relationship was incredibly more morally shaky than this one. So why was this situation, between two grown adults, treated any differently?

This is a serious accusation to make on 05.

You've basically accused your ex of what might be a crime on 05, if your relationship was anything but chaste and the ages you state are accurate. Not only that, you've all but stated that multiple members of staff and the community tacitly approved of this. You're not just describing something morally shaky. You're describing a situation that could very well be illegal and implicating the community.

If what you're saying is true, AHT should have investigated. They still can. I think it's an indictment of the community that they saw this questionable, potentially not legal age gap, and said nothing — and I think it's a very good thing that the community now is different from the community then, as that was the era when Bright was still on staff, though I may be mistaken. I would hope all members of staff agree with this as a positive change.

I am going to assume that you are telling the truth but have accidentally omitted a few key details — perhaps a closer age gap than the 4-year 15-19/16-20 described— as opposed to misrepresenting anything, because intentionally lying about a potentially life-ruining accusation such as this would be quite bad.

So please clarify. I know I have little right to ask this, but I would very much appreciate a statement that clarifies that you did not accuse someone of a potentially heinous crime on 05.

Finally, a small point: you claim that "any action either acting in staff capacity or not still makes a mark on the community as a whole," which is a fair and valid sentiment — but you spend a non-trivial portion of this response defending an AHT-banned user before making allegations about another user. Like you say, your personal life should be none of this site's business — but the fact that you're defending an AHT-banned user, and that you appear to know more about the "one incident of misjudgement" (that AHT thought worthy to ban for) than all the rest of us, and that you try to use events from the past to exonerate the present, gives me pause.

Noting that they have continued to not follow guidelines: (not in proper concept critique format) (repeat thread, with self-reply)

Re: Disciplinary - tbheda by ZynZyn, 28 Sep 2023 08:04

Potentially back as DocWeisshauptDocWeisshaupt:

Hi! I'm DocWeißhaupt, I like to write extremly long and detailed articles. If youre reading this, youre probably a critter, any articles marked with (d) are ideas that I was handed to by banned user delmenss. I reached out to him in private asking if I could wirte a tale around his "Little shack from Kröpelin" SCP-Article, THIS IS NOT A COLLAB!!!! He is actively helping me write in a clinical tone, and gave my the rights to use his ideas/drafts, again THIS IS NOT A COLLABERATION BETWEEN ME AND A BANNED USER.

Noting for records-keeping that the user in question had been PMing me over the past 4 days:

Hey so I just wrote a SCP article called SCP-7194: Dr. Falardeau and was wondering what you think

I dont think so I just got it as a actual thing it is now under the number 7258 I believe although I am new to the whole thing so I dont know how to do much yet

I asked them twice to provide a link to a forum review thread, which was never sent. I then received the following PM:

Hello Zyn, it is me again I was wondering did I get banned I'm really confused about this and was wondering if there was a reason and if I could just get a warning seeing how unless I was doing something horrible ( I am almost 100% sure I did not do anything that bad) It really does not seem fair that I was banned without any warning or anything like that. I do hope you can help me with this because I didn't mean to do anything wrong and unless there is actually a reason do you think you could help me or point me in the direction of someone who can help me. thank you for reading and your help would be greatly appreciated.

I linked them to the thread containing racist content and notified them of the permanent ban.

Avocadomilk: I checked the earlier promotion cycle threads and I noticed that the main areas of improvement for you last time, aren’t things I recognise in your current performance. Being able to recognise aspects of your behaviour as staff, work on yourself and grow are great traits. I’m happy to support.

Cicada3301Fan: You’re a great positive force and the work you do has been top notch. I also appreciate another warrior in the war for proper use of comma’s! However, I can’t help but wonder what would happen if you showed some teeth every once in a while. Asking questions is good, but I’d love to see you contribute to staff and policy discussion with your own pov. I think you’ve shown a lot of potential, but I’d love to see a bit more of *you* and not just your work. If you further your development in that area, I’m sure you’re a shoe-in for the next promotion cycle. Until then I’ll have to be reluctantly against.

DianaBerry: I’ve seen you hopping around Deer College recently, and I’ve noticed how careful you are in how you approach your work. A little too careful at times. A little more confidence and certainty would suit you well, I think. I was a little reluctant, but you stepping up on Sitenews and your direct steps resulting from Lord’s comment give me enough of a nudge to support.

divinephobia: I’ve seen you make moderation calls and I feel very confident in how you approach it. Over the months I've seen you grow into your role and stay very level-headed during discussions. Also amazing work on the ban queue, deserves to be said. Support.

Erminustay: I’ve seen the work you do, as well as jumping into policy discussions when you see fit and give your two cents. I’ll be able to support.

FlyPurgatorio It’s meeee!!! I’ve already given some self-reflection in my initial blurb, but I wanted to add a thank you to those adding their insights. I take everything to heart, especially points I can learn from to be better at being staff and a member of this community. I haven’t always hit the right note, but I try to learn from it. I definitely recognise getting stuck in the details, and that’ll be an area to focus on as well.
Appreciate you all!

LOVEMARGINAL: I haven’t seen you around much, outside CO for artwork. I absolutely appreciate the work you do there, but just like with Cicada, great work isn’t enough for a promotion to me. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but are you active in other areas of staff, policy discussions or behind-the-scene work? Until then I’ll also have to be (very reluctantly) against.
(With the sidenote that hearing from you about your plans for your current work and/or the OS promotion, would be helpful).

Mew-ltiverse: I have a lot of respect for the work you’ve been putting into IRC, the DC/IRC bridge, and the activity in Deer College. You’re always up for adding to crit policy discussions and I’ve noticed you’re not afraid to go against the grain. I've seen a lot of growth in your approach. My main advice would be to get out of the IRC bubble more (which is something you’re already working on) and allow yourself to look at it from the outside. Be critical of the things you love as well as the things you want to change, and don’t give more than you have. Deserved support.

ParallelPotatoes: A friend! Potato, you’re an absolute powerhouse with everything you do, and you do it with such kindness and care. You bring so much positivity to this community, and I admire you greatly. Please allow yourself to recognise your contribution and be confident in your insights. Getting nominated *twice* should tell you enough here! Obvious support.

scalykitty: This is a hard one to come down on. I know you dipped out due to the unexpected start of law school, which took you away from the team for good reason. I’ve seen you participate in crit policy discussion often when you’re on (before the whole law school stuff started), and you’ve done a lot of work for Flights (also continuing during law school). There have been times I've specifically checked in with you. I have no doubt about your ability to add to policy discussions (although I’d emphasise carefully reading threads and messages) and your contributions to critstaff in the long run. However, I’m concerned about your irl commitments, which are simply way more important, still fresh and not completely settled in. This is mostly a concern about whether you’re able to commit this cycle, or you should focus on getting back in the groove and be ready for next cycle. I fear you're taking on too much atm. I'm not in doubt about your capabilities; you'd be ready, but the timing isn't optimal. I'm going a bit back and forth between abstain and support, so I'll need a bit longer to mull that over.

tetsusquared: I’m not familiar with a lot of the areas you work in, but I trust the opinion of the other staffers on you. I’ll have to abstain.

Edit: fixed italics, some typos and phrasing.

Affirming emergency ban, let's make it a permanent one.

AvocadoMilk You've bounced back from the last promotions cycle phenomenally and have addressed everything thoroughly, that alone is something to be proud of. From what I've seen you do great work, you're level-headed, responsive, and reliable. Support.

Cicada3301Fan: Also with lord, you do good work in MAST, but if you're not giving valuable input to staff processes at large I don't see a reason for you to be OS. Against.

Dianaberry: I've seen some of the things you do on the arts committee and site news and I think OS would be good for you to take on more responsibilities I'm sure you're capable of. Support.

Divinephobia: As a moderator you do your job fantastically, and as an archivist, you do a thankless job yet vital, and I think you need thanks for it. Support.

Erminustay: I can't say I've seen much of what you do, but basing my opinion on what others have said here, I can feel comfortable supporting.

FlyPurgatorio: Calling it now, Fly as admin 2024. Speaking first hand you cover all of your duties incredibly: You're always a voice of reason in crit moderation who does a great job cataloging and storing everything, your work behind the scenes in policy is very impressive and detailed-oriented, and you always bring new ideas to the table. And, of course, your crit is great. My only nitpick is that you put the same amount of thought and effort (a lot) into everything, and not only is this a problem for burnout in the future, but we've had cases where you were very caught up in the details of something and missed the larger picture. Regardless of that admittedly very minor issue: Support.

LOVEMARGINAL: Same as Diana's but without the site news, I'd just like to see you interact a bit with more staff processes. Support.

Mew-ltiverse: IRC's strongest defender, a noble job. I genuinely admire your passion for improving IRC. Support.

ParallelPotatoes: Easiest support of my life. Almost singlehandedly pumps out the site news and still managed to tag over 120 pages. I don't have anything else to add that other people haven't already. Chin up, spud, your crown is falling. Support.

ScalyKitty: I'm so sorry but I can't support a promotion for someone who isn't here to accept it. I understand you're unable to because of real-life things (completely fair and understandable) but being active is a basic requirement for promotion in my opinion. Against.

Tetsusquared: I've never interacted with you, nor have I seen the work you do, no fault of your own of course, a lot of people on -EN rarely look into -INT and I'm sure your job is a thankless one, but that doesn't mean I know what it is. Abstain.

Something something gonna write scps maybe.

I'm not the right person to comment on the Rewrite related question, but I am currently in the process of rewriting an entry and have plans for more of them. I know of at least one rewrite that has been posted recently and another that's being worked on by other writers. It seems to me that there is still interest in rewriting these entries up for rewrite. Perhaps we could answer something along that line? I'd guess someone from the Rewrite team should weigh in, though.

page »
Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License