• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

The Death of SCP

Lonkitt said:
I don't think it would. Lethal Company, as far as I know, is its own thing that isn't at all structured like how SCP is. Its inspired by SCP, yes, but we don't make revisions for Ben 10 just because Way Big is based on Ultraman
Click to expand...
Agreed.

Btw: You can just send me a message if you want to have your staff position returned. 🙏
 
Another note:

If we remove the SCP pages from our wiki, somebody also needs to update the Internet category symbol in our wiki's front page with an image from some other very popular verse with an Internet-origin.

vsbattles.fandom.com

VS Battles Wiki

The VS Battles Wiki is the world's most comprehensive and popular index of statistics and powers for characters and items from all of popular fiction.
vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
I am personally fine if we delete the verse; it's not so much I had any hard feelings for the verse. I just personally thought Agnaa's post was making good points. But I think I'll just go ahead and side with the majority + the other staff who outrank the other staff, which the consensus is for the deletion. But archiving the pages and moving them to one of our sister wikis before deleting is a reasonable request. Though looks it seems up to the FC/OC staff decide if they want it there; if not, Joke Battles will be the one left.
Click to expand...
I want it known that I don't want you to feel pressured to side with the majority. You stated an opinion before and the fact that the tides have since turned in favor of deletion shouldn't be an argument to change with it. That said, if your opinion has genuinely shifted, whether by your own judgement or some arguments posted since you voted, then that's fine. In either case, I've changed your vote.

Antvasima said:
Another note:

If we remove the SCP pages from our wiki, somebody also needs to update the Internet category symbol in our wiki's front page with an image from some other very popular verse with an Internet-origin.

vsbattles.fandom.com

VS Battles Wiki

The VS Battles Wiki is the world's most comprehensive and popular index of statistics and powers for characters and items from all of popular fiction.
vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com
Click to expand...
I think good proposals that don't touch down in other categories too much would be:
  • Madness Combat (Oldest of the suggestions by about a year and possibly the most recognizable, although not the most popular)
  • Homestuck (Sufficient public knowledge and a very large fanbase)
  • Red vs Blue (The most notable of the Internet verses in terms of achievement and impact, I believe the most popular over time, and would also be a nice send-off for Rooster Teeth, still sad about that)
  • Hazbin Hotel (The most currently popular of the strictly Internet-based verses, I believe)
Of what we currently document, these four would be most appropriate.
 
Antvasima said:
Hazbin Hotel is currently featured via Amazon Prime. Homestuck seems like a good suggestion though.
Click to expand...
I don't follow the verse, I just knew its origins were in Internet publication, ditto for all of those (with each receiving some amount of greater expansion on it, like Homestuck and Madness Combat receiving video games, RvB being granted license by Halo's creators, and now the Hazbin Hotel thing).
 
Since I feel like this wasn't really considered by other people, my position isn't just a flat "Don't delete SCP", but rather, "If we want to manage our website being a bad influence on the SCP wiki, we should officially ask the SCP wiki staff what they think we can do to improve the situation, and try to implement their suggestions".
 
Aye. If it is a primary concern to others that SCP should only be deleted if it has a negative impact on their wiki, then that is fair enough. My own concern is not this, although I think it is true that we are hurting the SCP wiki to some extent.
 
I had been under the impression that Agnaa was pursuing this as of our discussions via Discord earlier today. @Agnaa is this not true?

I'd said it there but I will repeat it here: I do not think that such a discussion will bear fruit, least of all in any timely manner. It also doesn't reflect my own reasons for wanting the verse removed from the wiki, and as such isn't my position to push. Still, if it is insisted, I could contact them regarding their feelings on the subject, yes.
 
I'd be willing to handle it.
Mr. Bambu said:
I had been under the impression that Agnaa was pursuing this as of our discussions via Discord earlier today. @Agnaa is this not true?
Click to expand...
Not yet. As I said, I'd want something like that to be something relevant to this thread; by other people thinking it's a good idea, and that shifting the way we'd decide to treat it.
 
It doesn't really address the issues with the verse I've laid down: my concern is not for the wellbeing of their wiki, but rather ours. So even though I agree that we are negatively impacting their wiki, it isn't the reason for plying this deletion, and thus their position wouldn't change what I think is the ideal solution.

If others disagree, they are free to speak up on that, of course.
 
SeijiSetto said:
could i alternatively suggest sburb's house logo, i figure it's more recognizable at a glance for a representation of homestuck

commons.m.wikimedia.org

File:SBurb Logo.svg - Wikimedia Commons

commons.m.wikimedia.org commons.m.wikimedia.org

i can edit it into the frame later today if nobody's done it in the meantime
Click to expand...
Thank you very much for the help. I think that seems better, yes. 🙏
 
I've received permission to comment here from @Antvasima.

So basically, I do not think that Homestuck should be used, as I didn't see it being that popular in recent years, as far as I saw around, so I have some suggestions for verses:
Between the ones suggested from @Mr. Bambu I'd choose this however, if one of the three above are rejected:
Mr. Bambu said:
Madness Combat (Oldest of the suggestions by about a year and possibly the most recognizable, although not the most popular)
Click to expand...
I'd use for the image one of the many official artworks of Hank, given he's the protagonist and definitely the most recognizable MC character by far.
 
Why are you all talking like the thread has concluded? This is derailment.

With regards to the OP I think there's just a fundamental disconnect between the people advocating for SCP's removal and the people wanting to keep it on the site. Like does the opposition even know how SCP works? Have you actually participated in it enough to accurately deem the bleedover as a problem? I will address the crux of the argument first; this "influence" that Bambu claims goes against the wiki's policies is false. Let me begin by saying, the admins on the SCP wiki despise us. Honestly? Why shouldn't they? Imagine being brigaded by crusty battleboarders hoping to squeeze the last drop of WoG from you so they can prove their favourite SCP is the strongesttest. The articles and tales cited in the OP read more as spite or playful satire than direct influence to make the tiers bigger. Fundamentally, the idea of SCP is to write creative fiction in a world where monsters are contained by a clandestine operation. Beyond that, authors are able to write whatever they want. As such, most of what they write usually shares an identity with who they are as people. Sometimes this is more literal than others. So it makes sense that when authors are peeved by battleboarders being the annoying pricks we are, they'll write about us and cite us. None of what is in the OP can be used for any actual scaling, which I feel is the number one disqualifier for "having an influence" over the tiering.

If you want to go the route of "any influence regardless of tiering is bad influence" then how do you sus that out at all? Many verses on the site use battleboarding jargon or were indeed written to satirize the mere concept of battleboarding. "They can't mention us by name", well what if one does? It's no secret that many writers out there are hounded by battleboarders (from various sites, not just our own) and they very likely know we exist. Marvel and DC aren't above referencing pop culture in their media, and as we get more and more popular, what happens when we're literally namedropped in actual media? Hell, Thor already says something directly referencing battleboarding culture.

I believe Agnaa has the right idea about contacting the SCP admins and asking them how they feel about this situation. I'm pretty sure they have no idea how tiering works and the people here who think the writers do, don't know how SCP works. We can all mutually benefit from learning a bit more from each other before blindly smiting each other.
 
I will say that SCP is far from the worst offender in the "vs debating contamination", Parahuman is probably worse.
Wilbow (Parahuman's author) has directly commented and interacted with vs debating threads in Reddit, with those even offering various WoGs of varying quality.
So if SCP is going other online media really needs to be rechecked again, and this is not even mentioning series like Instant Death which is a vs debating wet dream since the author literally has fans send OCs to him for Yogiri to murder.
 
Tllmbrg said:
I will say that SCP is far from the worst offender in the "vs debating contamination", Parahuman is probably worse.
Wilbow (Parahuman's author) has directly commented and interacted with vs debating threads in Reddit, with those even offering various WoGs of varying quality.
So if SCP is going other online media really needs to be rechecked again, and this is not even mentioning series like Instant Death which is a vs debating wet dream since the author literally has fans send OCs to him for Yogiri to murder.
Click to expand...
I have no idea how someone can read the above SCP articles, with blatant Tiering System references and compare them to Wildbow's works.

For all his interactions with the fandom, there's little to no in-work "contamination" I saw in Worm and most of Ward. That's one of the main issues here, not just author interaction with the debate aspect of the fandom. For goodness sake, most of the setting is below Tier 7.

Can't speak for Instant Death though.
 
Last edited:
Tllmbrg said:
I will say that SCP is far from the worst offender in the "vs debating contamination", Parahuman is probably worse.
Wilbow (Parahuman's author) has directly commented and interacted with vs debating threads in Reddit, with those even offering various WoGs of varying quality.
So if SCP is going other online media really needs to be rechecked again, and this is not even mentioning series like Instant Death which is a vs debating wet dream since the author literally has fans send OCs to him for Yogiri to murder.
Click to expand...
Don't know how it is with Parahumans, but Instant Death straight-up has a professionally produced and licensed anime - its notability is on a different level making it a bad comparison.
And neither of these verses has the same issue as SCP, where it's just a pile of people's OCs stitched together. The fact that random people can, and evidently do, piggyback on SCP to make their vsdebate OCs is the main issue in my eye. Collaborative fiction where anyone can contribute is not great for the wiki.
Works with coherent storylines by singular authors don't have these issues, even if the authors talk vstalk on occasion. Of course, if it very blatantly starts to bleed into their work one has to start weighing that against the notability of the work again. Which is why we don't allow Suggsverse. Its notability is incredibly low and its vs-corruption incredibly high. That of course weighs on SCP as well, when the bigger authors there start vsstuff, in addition to the above.
 
Planck69 said:
I have no idea how someone can read the above SCP articles, with blatant Tiering System references and compare them to Wildbow's works.

For all his interactions with the fandom, there's little to no in-work "contamination" I saw in Worm and most of Ward. That's one of the main issues here, not just author interaction with the debate aspect of the fandom. For goodness sake, most of the setting is below Tier 7.
Click to expand...
Okay for starters, if "majority of the verse" is what matters most of SCP is not tier 1, a lot of it is not even above tier 9.
And one of the major points of this thread is that SCP writers even knowing about vs debating crap is bad, so I fail to see how this is any different
DontTalkDT said:
And neither of these verses has the same issue as SCP, where it's just a pile of people's OCs stitched together. The fact that random people can, and evidently do, piggyback on SCP to make their vsdebate OCs is the main issue in my eye. Collaborative fiction where anyone can contribute is not great for the wiki.
Works with coherent storylines by singular authors don't have these issues, even if the authors talk vstalk on occasion. Of course, if it very blatantly starts to bleed into their work one has to start weighing that against the notability of the work again. Which is why we don't allow Suggsverse. Its notability is incredibly low and its vs-corruption incredibly high. That of course weighs on SCP as well, when the bigger authors there start vsstuff, in addition to the above.
Click to expand...
As said many, many times no you can't just barge in and insert whatever thing you like for tiers. I fail to see what in SCP is more incoherent than either Marvel or DC, which frankly I think are harder to follow than SCP a lot of the time. This also doesn't change the fact that its author takes people's OC to just use in his work, which is contamination because obviously whoever throws their OC into the ring wants to see how Yogiri is even more OP than previously thought.
Just because one is more popular/made in a specific way doesn't make it better
 
What makes an OC different from any other work? If it's a license, SCP has it. If it's popularity, SCP is popular in internet circles. If it's ownership, SCP authors own the characters they make and other authors need their permission to use them, or at least can have the original author look over their article before being posted.

We've had this song and dance before and every time the same arguments come up and we give the same answers. Nothing has changed. So why are we back here again? You tell us bleedover is a problem so we come bearing far more egregious examples of it and you brush them aside. Nobody here who opposes SCP has ever read any of the recent articles have they? Why are you allowed to judge SCP and deem it unacceptable without ever having participated or bothered to actually understand it? You gave knowledgeable Backrooms supporters the benefit of hearing them out, why not us?

Again you're either ignoring me or not listening. NONE OF THE EXAMPLES PROVIDED BY THE OP IS USABLE FOR SCALING. We have not influenced SCP in any way that would boost tiers any more than a science fiction novel spouting pseudoscience jargon was influenced by us.

And if you believe just acknowledging we exist or directly referencing us is bad, then look at the examples of other accepted verses we give, and acknowledge the hypocrisy. "Parahumans isn't tier 1" Neither is 99% of SCP. We just chose to index the ones that were because who wants to see Mr. Fish on the wiki? Hell, by its very nature, a majority of SCPs aren't even indexable; they're either locations or wacky objects with no combat capabilities whatsoever.

"SCPs are just fact sheets" No they're demonstrably not. There are tales that expand the lore and even whole articles that are now mini epics. And even so, how is that not indexable? We allow
1200px-Fucktext.svg.png
ing Shen Comix on the wiki and they're literally just one off characters that are never mentioned again.

If you choose to move forward with the deletion of the verse without even attempting to engage in it, you will just demonstrate to everyone watching how credible we are as a wiki; forever cemented by a thread anyone can read.
 
Sir_Ovens said:
What makes an OC different from any other work? If it's a license, SCP has it. If it's popularity, SCP is popular in internet circles. If it's ownership, SCP authors own the characters they make and other authors need their permission to use them, or at least can have the original author look over their article before being posted.

We've had this song and dance before and every time the same arguments come up and we give the same answers. Nothing has changed. So why are we back here again? You tell us bleedover is a problem so we come bearing far more egregious examples of it and you brush them aside. Nobody here who opposes SCP has ever read any of the recent articles have they? Why are you allowed to judge SCP and deem it unacceptable without ever having participated or bothered to actually understand it? You gave knowledgeable Backrooms supporters the benefit of hearing them out, why not us?

Again you're either ignoring me or not listening. NONE OF THE EXAMPLES PROVIDED BY THE OP IS USABLE FOR SCALING. We have not influenced SCP in any way that would boost tiers any more than a science fiction novel spouting pseudoscience jargon was influenced by us.

And if you believe just acknowledging we exist or directly referencing us is bad, then look at the examples of other accepted verses we give, and acknowledge the hypocrisy. "Parahumans isn't tier 1" Neither is 99% of SCP. We just chose to index the ones that were because who wants to see Mr. Fish on the wiki? Hell, by its very nature, a majority of SCPs aren't even indexable; they're either locations or wacky objects with no combat capabilities whatsoever.

"SCPs are just fact sheets" No they're demonstrably not. There are tales that expand the lore and even whole articles that are now mini epics. And even so, how is that not indexable? We allow
1200px-Fucktext.svg.png
ing Shen Comix on the wiki and they're literally just one off characters that are never mentioned again.

If you choose to move forward with the deletion of the verse without even attempting to engage in it, you will just demonstrate to everyone watching how credible we are as a wiki; forever cemented by a thread anyone can read.
Click to expand...
This is the most perfect thing I never had the mind to say. I salute you. If we went through with this deletion, we'd be a bad wiki.
 
Agnaa said:
Since I feel like this wasn't really considered by other people, my position isn't just a flat "Don't delete SCP", but rather, "If we want to manage our website being a bad influence on the SCP wiki, we should officially ask the SCP wiki staff what they think we can do to improve the situation, and try to implement their suggestions".
Click to expand...
I think this is a worthwhile idea. I mentioned on discord that I've found the petty insults thrown out by Fishish to be a lot more frustrating than any perceived tiering bleed through, so I think collaborating to lower bad blood and the potential for writers inflating the stats could go a long way.
Mr. Bambu said:
I'd said it there but I will repeat it here: I do not think that such a discussion will bear fruit, least of all in any timely manner.
Click to expand...
... Why does it need to be in a timely manner? Will SCP suddenly jump a tier in a week because we don't delete it as of this moment?

This isn't like, a medical emergency. There can at least be one or two conversations between some people in the background before we jump to shooting old yeller.
 
Again I don’t really care whether or not SCP stays but Parahumans is an absolutely atrocious example to use. It’s a coherent series of web serials where its author just happens to know about powerscaling. He doesn’t directly engage with this site, this site doesn’t influence his writing in the slightest and powerscalers can’t actually add to his canon.
 
Sir_Ovens said:
Why are you all talking like the thread has concluded? This is derailment.

With regards to the OP I think there's just a fundamental disconnect between the people advocating for SCP's removal and the people wanting to keep it on the site. Like does the opposition even know how SCP works? Have you actually participated in it enough to accurately deem the bleedover as a problem? I will address the crux of the argument first; this "influence" that Bambu claims goes against the wiki's policies is false. Let me begin by saying, the admins on the SCP wiki despise us. Honestly? Why shouldn't they? Imagine being brigaded by crusty battleboarders hoping to squeeze the last drop of WoG from you so they can prove their favourite SCP is the strongesttest. The articles and tales cited in the OP read more as spite or playful satire than direct influence to make the tiers bigger. Fundamentally, the idea of SCP is to write creative fiction in a world where monsters are contained by a clandestine operation. Beyond that, authors are able to write whatever they want. As such, most of what they write usually shares an identity with who they are as people. Sometimes this is more literal than others. So it makes sense that when authors are peeved by battleboarders being the annoying pricks we are, they'll write about us and cite us. None of what is in the OP can be used for any actual scaling, which I feel is the number one disqualifier for "having an influence" over the tiering.
Click to expand...
I've explained how it "works" in the OP, at least to the degree that one would need to properly vote on this CRT. And I can't see how any of this proves the problem as "false"- just because the SCP staff hate you doesn't mean that they're blocking out every instance of VSBW-bleed, which is evidently proven by the various sources of the OP itself. Their feelings towards us means nothing, it is what their site is doing to protect itself that is relevant.

Your last statement is objectively false. What is in the OP can be used under current written and assumed policies. The only thing blocking it is the common sense and good graces of the SCP people (you and the others working on it).

If you want to go the route of "any influence regardless of tiering is bad influence" then how do you sus that out at all? Many verses on the site use battleboarding jargon or were indeed written to satirize the mere concept of battleboarding. "They can't mention us by name", well what if one does? It's no secret that many writers out there are hounded by battleboarders (from various sites, not just our own) and they very likely know we exist. Marvel and DC aren't above referencing pop culture in their media, and as we get more and more popular, what happens when we're literally namedropped in actual media? Hell, Thor already says something directly referencing battleboarding culture.
Click to expand...
By insight? At least one of the two major instances in the OP (A Journey Through the Afterlife) of non-explicit battleboarding terminology has openly admitted that, yes, we are right, they wrote it for battleboarding purposes. Just not for VSBW, but rather some other wiki. Just have some level of awareness and critical thinking when reading something and you can almost certainly sense something as "off". A reference is not equivalent to deliberately tuning your terminology to achieve insanely high tiers: this is the crux of the issue, not what you're talking about. We wouldn't delete Marvel if they mentioned VSBW getting their tiering wrong or whatever, we would delete whatever branch of it if their writers all started talking about our tiering system and then wrote up a huge story that made every character they liked Tier 1-A to 0.

I believe Agnaa has the right idea about contacting the SCP admins and asking them how they feel about this situation. I'm pretty sure they have no idea how tiering works and the people here who think the writers do, don't know how SCP works. We can all mutually benefit from learning a bit more from each other before blindly smiting each other.
Click to expand...
You guys are free to pursue that if you like. I figure it's a waste of time but then it's not really a qualifying factor for me- their opinion on the matter doesn't factor into what is right for the site, our site. So I don't care.

Tllmbrg said:
I will say that SCP is far from the worst offender in the "vs debating contamination", Parahuman is probably worse.
Wilbow (Parahuman's author) has directly commented and interacted with vs debating threads in Reddit, with those even offering various WoGs of varying quality.
So if SCP is going other online media really needs to be rechecked again, and this is not even mentioning series like Instant Death which is a vs debating wet dream since the author literally has fans send OCs to him for Yogiri to murder.
Click to expand...
The issue with this is that it presumes any knowledge of our systems means a verse needs to be deleted. Our policies currently allow for it, and I don't agree that Wildbow's writing is "gaming" the system so much as using it to define new abilities and such. His verse is almost entirely contained within Tier 9, and nothing is scratching at the tippy top of the Tiering System and beyond- it's not written to be the most overpowered special-est little baby boy in the world, it's just written with some knowledge of how we consider abilities like Invulnerability or Biological Manipulation. It's also not able to be contributed to publicly. It's not even a little comparable. I don't know enough about Instant Death, so I could grant a "possibly" there, sure. Maybe it should go. I'm not in a position to say either way.
 
I’d also like to point out that Worm was written before Antvasima was even a staff member. So it’s delusional to act like this site had any influence on it. Whereas there at least seems to be a reasonable argument that VSBW is directly impacting some of the “canon” here
 
Last edited:
DMUA said:
I think this is a worthwhile idea. I mentioned on discord that I've found the petty insults thrown out by Fishish to be a lot more frustrating than any perceived tiering bleed through, so I think collaborating to lower bad blood and the potential for writers inflating the stats could go a long way.

... Why does it need to be in a timely manner? Will SCP suddenly jump a tier in a week because we don't delete it as of this moment?

This isn't like, a medical emergency. There can at least be one or two conversations between some people in the background before we jump to shooting old yeller.
Click to expand...
I completely missed this.

No, s'pose not, but since it isn't something I think is relevant to the core issue (barring some extreme, sweeping changes offered by the SCP staff, including the deletion of many articles that are well within their requirements otherwise), I don't want to wait weeks to hear from them. If the voting gets into a gridlock, it's a last ditch effort, I suppose, but this isn't the deciding factor of the thread for most people, insofar as I can tell.
 
Mr. Bambu said:
By insight? At least one of the two major instances in the OP (A Journey Through the Afterlife) of non-explicit battleboarding terminology has openly admitted that, yes, we are right, they wrote it for battleboarding purposes. Just not for VSBW, but rather some other wiki. Just have some level of awareness and critical thinking when reading something and you can almost certainly sense something as "off". A reference is not equivalent to deliberately tuning your terminology to achieve insanely high tiers: this is the crux of the issue, not what you're talking about. We wouldn't delete Marvel if they mentioned VSBW getting their tiering wrong or whatever, we would delete whatever branch of it if their writers all started talking about our tiering system and then wrote up a huge story that made every character they liked Tier 1-A to 0.
Click to expand...
We can literally just disregard that tale. It has no ties to any of the major canons and exists in a vacuum.
 
Sir_Ovens said:
We can literally just disregard that tale. It has no ties to any of the major canons and exists in a vacuum.
Click to expand...
This is, IMO, the crux of the point everyone who supports this deletion is missing. All of the articles referenced are either standalone things we wouldn't index anyway, grasping at straws to see them as referencing us, or are straight-up satire that doesn't impact the greater SCP mythos at all. Seeing them as something that should damn the mythos as a whole is throwing out a man for getting an infection in a few cells.
 
Sir_Ovens said:
We can literally just disregard that tale. It has no ties to any of the major canons and exists in a vacuum.
Click to expand...
You're not thinking clearly about what these tales represent in terms of whether the verse is compromised. The position in defense of the verse has always been that there's no demonstrable tampering that has survived the screening process: this is now objectively proven as false, Ovens. The defense is now "but we can just ignore those instances", coming from a person who just a post before was saying it was impossible to tell whether something was written with that intent.

These are only the most blatant, deliberate, insanely on-the-nose examples. We have no knowledge how much of the insanely high tiered shit from SCP was written by somebody with direct working knowledge of our conventions or the conventions of some other pocket of the powerscaling community. The fact that it is proven that at least some of them are working with that, brings the entire verse into this point. Something about "one bad apple spoiling the batch", except really it's many bad apples with some having made it through the filters.
 
Agnaa said:
Since I feel like this wasn't really considered by other people, my position isn't just a flat "Don't delete SCP", but rather, "If we want to manage our website being a bad influence on the SCP wiki, we should officially ask the SCP wiki staff what they think we can do to improve the situation, and try to implement their suggestions".
Click to expand...
I feel like that’ll just muddy the waters for an actual conclusion though. Like, starting a whole dialogue with them because our VS debating site happened to affect their own site is just gonna delay the inevitable and likely lead nowhere. Our best move is to just flat out delete SCP. Remember, it doesn’t matter what we discuss with them. I could quite literally go on the site right now and hypothetically make a new SCP inspired by a ton of VS debating lingo and stuff. Sure, that doesn’t guarantee it’ll get a page here and affect several others, but just talking with SCP Wiki members doesn’t solve anything

If anything, I think contacting the SCP Wiki members will just lead to conflict. Do we really believe these guys who are writing this stuff for fun want a bunch of powerscalers asking how to fix things?
 
Last edited:
Lonkitt said:
If anything, I think contacting the SCP Wiki members will just lead to conflict. Do we really believe these guys who are writing this stuff for fun want a bunch of powerscalers asking how to fix things?
Click to expand...
If they hate us so much they'll actively refuse our collaboration specifically to make sure their site isn't getting power scaling questions/tierwank and we're both in a better position, they should say that for themselves. I think it's better to at least try, even if a flat "no" is a potential answer.
 
You guys are free to contact them if it has a bearing on your vote and how that goes. But the thread may continue and even conclude regardless of their answer, whether they do so or not. I do encourage you to try and use your own deliberations to decide how you want to vote, as I told Agnaa before.
 
DMUA said:
If they hate us so much they'll actively refuse our collaboration specifically to make sure their site isn't getting power scaling questions/tierwank and we're both in a better position, they should say that for themselves. I think it's better to at least try, even if a flat "no" is a potential answer.
Click to expand...
I personally don't see the point. The majority of staff members voting here say to delete it, we have evidence that the wiki's VS debating meta is interfering with the writing, there's a lack of distinct continuity that the SCP Wiki itself addresses all the time, and even if we did find a solution that keeps SCP on the wiki, it literally won't stop all these issues from occurring again

Everything points to this verse needing to leave VSBW. Delaying the inevitable with a chat with actual SCP Wiki members will delay this by a solid year and a half
 
Sir_Ovens said:
Let me begin by saying, the admins on the SCP wiki despise us. Honestly? Why shouldn't they? Imagine being brigaded by crusty battleboarders hoping to squeeze the last drop of WoG from you so they can prove their favourite SCP is the strongesttest.
Click to expand...
Sir_Ovens said:
So it makes sense that when authors are peeved by battleboarders being the annoying pricks we are, they'll write about us and cite us.
Click to expand...
Just a note that, as somebody who has not been interested in battleboarding for a very long time, and strictly stays around because several thousand people here need my help, I think that we have managed to build a comparatively very nice, tolerant, and collaborative community, whether compared to other battleboard sites or other types of Internet communities. 🙏❤️
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sir_Ovens
The SCP Mass Exodus
2
Replies
66
Views
7K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Padaruyos
The Commoner's Thread: The Death of SCP
16 17 18
Replies
696
Views
33K
Javenplayz253
Javenplayz253
Peppersalt43
SCP-098 Profile Revision
Replies
8
Views
986
Kirinator07
Kirinator07
AmogusSusfunni
SCP-2317 downgrade
Replies
4
Views
791
AmogusSusfunni
AmogusSusfunni
Comiphorous
SCP-682 adapted to VSBattles and is missing a weakness (NEEDS STAFF)
2
Replies
40
Views
4K
Kirinator07
Kirinator07
Back
Top