@Losercel's comment on 'A treatise on the dramatic events on the SCP wiki'

Background

The SCP Foundation is a fictional organization that exists in an online collaborative writing community. It is described as a secret global organization tasked with containing and researching anomalous entities, artifacts, and phenomena, collectively referred to as SCPs (Seethe, Cope, Pilate). SCPs can range from seemingly harmless objects to reality-bending entities that pose a significant threat to humanity. The Foundation is highly secretive and operates outside of government jurisdiction, with the authority to use any means necessary to contain and study SCPs, including amnestics to wipe the memories of witnesses, and termination of SCPs and Foundation personnel (with different security clearance levels) when deemed necessary. The Foundation is divided into several departments, each responsible for different aspects of SCP containment and research. The SCP Foundation has spawned a large and dedicated fan community, with thousands of articles, stories, and other creative works exploring the various SCPs and the Foundation's shenanigans, many of which have reached mainstream appeal such as SCP-682 or SCP-106. The quality of the entries greatly differs as many writes struggle to execute their 'good' concepts or they have the ability to actually write but then their concept sucks. Or both. This is especially common amongst the older entries which are therefore the epitome of sovl. While earlier entries of the wiki (commonly referred to as classics or series one entries) are either (i) typical rip offs of ubiquitous tropes found in horror and its adjacent genres or (ii) straight up stolen from old creepypastas or (iii) absolute fantastic masterpieces withstanding the test of time, new entries tend to be fustian conglomerations of fancy hapax legomena (such as para or anything involving narrative) including as many references to (i) pop culture, (ii) characters who appear in multiple entries and (iii) to other entries as possible. Neither of which are particularly interesting and at this point I doubt I'll ever read a good new SCP again.

Drama

Some staff member decided to call it and thus quit moderating the wiki as shown in this announcement. In case you're wondering why this guy quits over and over again, one look at his author page and his twitter should answer all questions. Normally this isn't really noteworthy at all but his last action was the deletion of the infamous Bright List:

Ah, and I've deleted the Bright List. This was not done on accident - I've intentionally done so. Peace!

The Bright List - namely The Things Dr Bright Is Not Allowed To Do is a collective list of things Dr. Bright is not allowed to do. It's absolutely terrible and the culmination of unfunny and uncontrolled spergatory as most entries have either aged very badly (e.g. "43. Nothing in the Foundation is rated 'Over 9000.'") or were never funny or interesting or remotely good to begin with. In case you are interested, Dr. Bright is a recurring character in the SCP Foundation universe, and his role varies depending on the canon and interpretation of the writers. However, there are some common characteristics associated with Dr. Bright across different iterations. In many versions, Dr. Bright is an immortal entity that can transfer his consciousness into other bodies, including those of SCPs. He is also known for his sarcastic sense of humor and disregard for authority, which often leads to conflict with other Foundation personnel. Dr. Bright is typically associated with several SCPs, but especially SCP-963, a necklace that allows its wearer to host Dr. Bright's consciousness.

>So what's the deal with the deletion of that entry and why is Dr. Bright such an eccentric character?

The List is a page that features the character Dr. Bright, who is the in-universe avatar of AdminBright. This page has existed as a nominally collaborative log, however most - if not all - content was created or approved by AdminBright. This guy was always known as a groomer, sexpest and absolute sperg and was completely removed last year: AdminBright received an Anti-Harassment ban in May of 2022

Unwelcome sexual attention, including sending users sexual images, pressuring sexual discussion or interaction, or repeated unwanted flirting.

Repeated inappropriate social contact, such as requesting/assuming inappropriate levels of intimacy with others.

Encouraging any of the behaviors defined by the Harassment Policy.

As the List was deleted by the guy who retired it had to be restored but it lost all of its upmarseys :soycry: as shown here Statement Regarding the Deletion of The List. There is currently, and there has historically been, a strong push from the community to remove or further censor The List as some of its entries strongly resemble the crimes AdmiralBright committed and most of the fan base isn't d'accord with such raunchy acts of lewdness being depicted on such a famous list. This is a sentiment shared amongst many members of staff as shown in the following threads: [DISCUSSION] Bright's List and it's corresponding staff discussion Staff:[DISCUSSION] Bright's List which propose different final solutions to the Bright question. Most of the discussion here is incredibly boring so do not bother. If you want to see what kind of acts AdmiraBright did I recommend the following Twitter chain:

https://x.com/DaisyBelleJpeg/status/1574257748774109184

Isn’t this a bit disrespectful to their victims? Personally I’m neutral to the use of bright the character but between it being a possession fetish thing for the author, the character having been a 1:1 self insert for them for the longest time, and them actually wanting-

It’s a character… Characters are not real people…..

Homie i was groomed by the bastard, egged on to use the amulet by them to take nsfw pics of myself in it without knowing it was a fetish thing under the pretense of them wanting “bright porn” was a fan, they took advantage

or this guy complaining about Bright making fun of their attempt to make a game about the foundation:

https://old.reddit.com/r/HobbyDrama/comments/116c1wp/hobby_scuffles_week_of_february_20_2023/j9i2efs/

Wish it stayed deleted or was heavily neutered, if only to whittle down the legacy of the dude.

My first and only encounter with AdminBright was when he was apparently egosurfing and learned that in Journal/Dreamwidth Roleplay, there was an attempt to do an SCP game. Clearly that meant he had to barge in during the game maker's attempt to build it, harassing them and threatening to sue them or something.

We mocked him out of the platform but, understandably, the game maker didn't want to go through with it anymore. It caused me to have a distaste for all things SCP after.

The actual drama

The most prominent wiki writer djkaktus has finally made the move to finally kill off the character replacing him with Dr. Elias Shaw.

Bright is dead.

I have killed him.

In his place, I offer you Dr. Elias Shaw, a wild Foundation doctor cursed to wear SCP-963. Any similarities to other characters, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Should you find yourself having written articles containing a specific dead and obsolete character, perhaps you too should introduce Dr. Shaw to those articles. I can assure you - Dr. Shaw won't commit any (alleged) non-fictional s*x crimes.

That actions is discussed in the following thread and it's pretty cringe as djkaktus thinks he is the next Æsop or something idk I'm neither smart nor well-read enough to make good literary references

Regarding Elias Shaw

Hello everyone, djkaktus here.

It's been a while since I've had a chance to talk to you, and while I hate that it's these grim circumstances that have brought us together again, I wanted to clear the air and make some information available to people who, very reasonably, have a lot of questions.

As many of you know, about a year ago the individual called "adminbright" was banned from the wiki due to a variety of s*x-based aggressions against other members of the community, many of these offenses having taken place well over a decade ago. This left the community with an interesting situation - is it possible to separate the scumbag author of a work with the work itself? You'll get as many different answers to that question as people you ask, but the crux of the issue remains: does the presence of the character bearing the name (and, in many older articles, much of the same behaviors) of the author create additional harm in the community?

Before I go any further, I want to admit two biases here. I have no love of bright the man. In my time as staff years ago and in the years since, I found him to be a whole intolerable piece of shit who had ridden the high from his own supply for far too long. Those if you in the know will remember how often I called for his removal from staff, both on Twitter and in various groomercords over the last few years. The reason my Paragon series exists at all is because of an attempt to spite him over a rewrite - his Jack of Hearts article, a story about a r*pe goblin with a giant peepee, had reached the deletion threshold and was up for rewrite. My contribution to that effort was The Demon La Hire, which he turned down due to it not being a sufficiently quality and faithful adaptation of his original r*pe goblin article. I posted that article anyway, and the only Jack of Hearts that now holds any relevance on the wiki is mine, not his.

Secondly, I am the author of the highest upmarseyd articles featuring the character formerly known as Jack Bright outside of the original SCP-963 itself - those being Bush v Gore, The Plurality of (Jack Bright), and MEGALOMANIA. In the time since the character's initial inclusion in my own SCP-4444, I've worked to try and redeem the character's image, both for myself and for my audience. I enjoy the characterization of a goofy foundation doctor who is at the same time gripped with the existential despair of being shackled to a world he should have left long ago, tethered forever to a transient existence by way of an unfortunate piece of jewelry. I've written this character in many different pieces, and two more that I'm trying to finish in the next few months (those being "lolfoundation" and "The Life Everlasting"), and it has been my belief that the character could be sufficiently separated from his unfortunate name simply by making him a compelling character all his own. The feedback I received from his inclusion in those articles, specifically in Plurality and Bush v Gore, only served to reinforce my preconceptions about what I was trying to accomplish.

However, I believe I was misguided. The name "Bright" is a stain on the wiki. This is through no fault of anyone who has written for the character in a way that was unique from his original incarnation, and it certainly is not my fault. But it simply is not reasonable to presume that a name can be so thoroughly dismissed from the annals of our history if we continue to foster that name in new works. Regardless of how compelling a character he might be, and regardless of who takes up the torch of maintaining that character now that AdminBright has been relegated to the dustbin, the character Jack Bright will forever carry the taint of his own name.

Last night, at the suggestion of many of my friends both on and off staff, I edited every article I've written that contained the character of Jack Bright, removing his name entirely. In his place is the name character, with a new name - Dr. Elias Shaw. For all intents and purposes, as far as my own work is concerned, Jack Bright never registered. I have, and always have been, writing about the character Elias Shaw. Elias is not so different from the character called Jack Bright - they both wear SCP-963. They both grew up in the foundation. They're both functionally immortal. But Elias is not named in that wretched list, nor does he share a name with a person who caused harm to this community for well over a decade.

In the next few hours, I will be releasing my own redux of SCP-963, creatively titled SCP-0963. I have no misconceptions about staff allowing a rewrite of an article currently rated at well over +1400, but it is my belief that Elias, similar though he may be to the character Jack Bright, deserves his own origin story - especially one that will hopefully age better than the dreadful 963 that exists today.

I recognize that I will not win over everyone by doing this. I've read comments in this reddit already by people who have grown fond of the character and just wish we could separate the character from the author and leave it alone. I can't pretend to tell you how to feel on this issue - and it's none of my business either way. But I no longer believe it is possible to differentiate the two in a way that would sufficiently reduce further harm caused by this man's legacy existing in this space. I'm not naive - I know that the name Jack Bright will persist, likely into perpetuity without staff intervention, but if it does it will have done so without my cooperation. Some of you will no doubt believe this is just more virtue signaling from the wiki's premiere virtue signaler. To that I say, suck my peepee and frick off.

If you have written about the character Jack Bright and similarly wish to see his name stricken from the record, I encourage you to give Elias a chance. We've already received a significant amount of positive feedback on the change, and many of my fellow authors are already adjusting their own works accordingly.

Regardless of what you decide to do, I hope you will do it with a mind of sensitivity towards those who have been hurt by this man over the history of his time on the wiki. Maybe we can't kill Jack Bright, but I do believe with enough time we can all forget about him.

If you've made it this far, I appreciate your consideration. I hope you're all doing well, and that the years have been kind to you and yours.

Thank you, and goodnight.

Some Reactions:

:marseymetokur:

https://old.reddit.com/r/SCP/comments/11ahpma/regarding_elias_shaw/j9ufwqz/

We don't burn the work of every writer, director, and game developer that gets cancelled. I can't support this.

He wasn't "cancelled", he was exposed as a groomer and a libertarian.

djkaktus getting schooled

https://old.reddit.com/r/SCP/comments/11ahpma/regarding_elias_shaw/j9t1hpu/

this honestly just comes off as a very shallow solution, a random author declaring this is extremely wierd to me. i despise admin bright but this is a bizarre and self-centred way to remove their legacy. also i sincerely hope staff don't allow a 963 replacement to just be shoved on the article regardless of admin brights behaviour because of the precedent it could set

Yes, just some random author.

okay you have the most collective upmarseys, so what? i don't think letting non-staff set precedent on the wiki because they have clout is a good road to go down

Set the precedent of... Editing their own articles?

i was refering to attempting to rewrite 963, no issue with you changing your own stuff obviously. even if i think just changing the name is a little silly without also adapting the character

I said I'd like to rewrite it, not that I'm demanding to.

yeah and im saying i hope staff don't let it happen, no offense. i dont think anyone here wants staff to have the power to overwrite articles of banned users in general, even if in this case id happily toss all admin brights work into a big fire

i don't think i need to explain why letting clout get to author's heads might be a bad idea on a post about admin fricking bright.

no, but you see, THIS admin insert will be way better. Don't you trust the guy with years of monkey cheese experience?

djkaktus getting schooled again:

https://old.reddit.com/r/SCP/comments/11ahpma/regarding_elias_shaw/j9y0szq/

glad one of the most boring authors found a way to make this all about him and his articles

Nice, you got me.

Lots of seethe in this chain:

https://old.reddit.com/r/SCP/comments/11ahpma/regarding_elias_shaw/j9s8tvn/

idk why people are incapable of separating good writing and art from the author.

Reddit Threads

There are some reddit threads about all of this but I won't be going into detail here so feel free to browse them yourself:

Discussion

Do you like SCPs? If yes, what's your favourite entry? Do you prefer the older entries or are you a tasteless casual who reads 5000 words of high-quality nonsense and argues with other r-slurs why Pickman-Sinclair detectors don't work in our reality as defined by the pataphysics department?

Here are some of my favourites:

SCP-085 :marseydeadinside2: