Here's One I Prepared Earlier

Summary:

...I did say I was keen. Don't judge me xD

Here's One I Prepared Earlier

TyrantGanado 08 Feb 2012 10:26

Right chaps and ladies, when I was milling around this site before signing up I tried my hand at writing an SCP of my own. Now, it's not perfect, obviously, but I'd like to here what you think of it nonetheless. All advice welcome.

Happy reading.

Re: Here's One I Prepared Earlier

vampyre_smiles 08 Feb 2012 10:34

In the area you have all the [REDACTED]s… Just cut out from the first one to the last one and make it one [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] isn't just for single words, it just means something was deemed best left out by higher ups.

Re: Here's One I Prepared Earlier

TyrantGanado 08 Feb 2012 10:52

The slew of [REDACTED]s was supposed to be for dramatic effect. It's less effective than I thought then I guess heh.

Re: Here's One I Prepared Earlier

Rioghail 13 Feb 2012 23:05

I really like this idea, and it reminds me somewhat of SCP-048 for obvious reasons. I think the last half of the description could use a pruning, since one or two sentences would probably suffice.

Also, while not entirely a contradiction this is somewhat strange: the rogue article is 'clearly official Foundation work', but at the same time is shockingly unprofessional and wildly different from a standard article. While this isn't technically contradictory, it doesn't make much sense to me.

I'd actually prefer it if SCP-1704 didn't contain any divergence from the normal writing style. That way, any article on the main list could easily be the SCP.

Re: Here's One I Prepared Earlier

Lycan Therapy 14 Feb 2012 18:49

Damn. I was going to write something like this.

I do like this, although when I started reading it I imagined you making another article and adding it to the SCP listing while keeping the [ACCESS DENIED] title. Might be novel.

Re: Here's One I Prepared Earlier

TyrantGanado 15 Feb 2012 05:56

I've altered it a little bit. I moved some stuff around and got rid of the time travel 'subplot' thingy.

Opinions? Better or worse?

Re: Here's One I Prepared Earlier

Rioghail 15 Feb 2012 11:02

It cleared up some of the problems I had with it, but I still think you need to clear up the [REDACTED] tags. There's too many of them.

Re: Here's One I Prepared Earlier

TyrantGanado 15 Feb 2012 16:02

Fair point. I'm also trying to think of something to differentiate it from 976. I was thinking of u-turning and reinstating the from the future aspect and expanding on it but things from the future are overdone a tad.

Re: Here's One I Prepared Earlier

VAElynx 15 Feb 2012 16:55

Ugh.
I don't like this one at all. For one, there's too few interesting stuff left over after the redaction and expungement bombardment, besides, some sentences are incomprehensible , like

SCP-1704 appears as any other database entry in The Foundation’s archives, namely SCP-███

Any means any - this is akin to saying "Adam could have chosen any woman on Earth to be his wife, namely, Eva".

SCP-████ appears to be [REDACTED] which, when exposed to select conditions causes it to [DATA EXPUNGED].

This is a typical example. This sentence can apply to any SCP in existence and has zero information content.
In fact.
SCP-████ appears to be a pony which, when exposed to select conditions causes it to sprout a cutie mark.

Also, uncontained SCP? Never mind it would have not been classified as such - there's the E-classification in canon for objects not yet contained, this is just lazy and goes against the few bits of common narrative.
This is the bloody foundation - we contain indestructible lizards ,gods, Baba Yaga, selfreproducing cakes, lovecraftian monsters and ancient greek pottery of doom. What makes your object so special it can't be?
There are a few examples which aren't contained, but there are bloody good reasons why.

Besides, in a way , this reminds me of Fred if he was a file

Last edited on 15 Feb 2012 16:55 by VAElynx + Show more

Re: Here's One I Prepared Earlier

TyrantGanado 15 Feb 2012 17:22

You can't exactly use concrete and turrets to contain self-moving data, can you? It has caused no visible harm so resorting to extreme measures is unnecessary. Besides, there is no canon.

Your other criticisms are perfectly valid, though.

After actually reading it over with my best attempt at detachment I saw some things I didn't like and changed them though now it feels lacking and far too short. Anyone have any suggestions or should I just give up and go home?

Re: Here's One I Prepared Earlier

VAElynx 15 Feb 2012 19:34

So.. you think of something else?
Look up Fred, Ghost in the Machine ,and lots of other SCPs which are in some ways similar, yet they have been contained.
Also, there is not a lot of canon, but some things practically are, otherwise we could interpret SCP to be Sweet Cute Pony instead of Special Containment Procedures- D-class personnel, O5 council and the whole security clearances shtick… The fact that we contain things as opposed to throw hands up in the air, or bend over backwards for them i am pretty sure is such a basic convention too.

Last edited on 15 Feb 2012 19:35 by VAElynx + Show more