Very good starting point - don't leave it here! Just something I noticed, make sure it's very clear to readers exactly what "SCP-2455-1" is describing.
+1
SCP-2455 / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-2455
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-2455.
This still contains errors I mentioned when I first reviewed it in the forums, most notably not coherently establishing what the XXXX-1 designation actually is before describing how it interacts with the core XXXX SCP. Also, I'm still not entirely convinced that XXXX really needs to be the core SCP since it's not inherently anomalous at all, no matter what it says about itself (besides, having the SCP be the sole source of information on itself is kind of lackluster in terms of narrative).
Furthermore, there are several mechanical errors present (e.g. "bares" vs "bears" though "exhibits" or "possesses" would be a better word, hers vs. her's, effects vs. affects)
Also, the containment procedures are kind of goofy. Why on earth would "Containment Breach alarms" need to be sounded if nothing is actually breaching containment? The entire article, frankly, feels like it's hyping up the subject here… it doesn't seem nearly as dangerous nor significant as the article seems to believe it to be.
Edit: Also, now that I've read the interview log… ehh. I don't buy the XXXX-1 instance's claim that the girl would be made a Foundation researcher, especially given that she's the target of an anomaly and that would interfere with any sort of work done for the Foundation, and plus she's got no recorded lab/experimentation/industry/etc. skills or experiments that would make her a researcher candidate in the first place.
Made the 2455-1 description it's own paragraph (hopefully making it obvious), replaced bares with exhibits on your suggestion, added a note to the containment procedures.
Not sure how to address your last concern. Lemme think some more on it.
added a note to the containment procedures.
This, uh… actually made it kind of worse? My point is that the SCP doesn't display any indication that would make an outside observer believe that these listed precautions are necessary. This individual is inherently very much average, and even if they were accosted by a member of a GOI, I don't see why the Foundation would need to be so preemptively concerned. Even if this individual joined a GOI (what would they have to offer to said GOI anyway?), the best course of action would be to keep them either sedated around the clock or simply amnesticized and provided with a cover story.
Also, a containment breach alarm usually would result in staff evacuations and security dispatch. Neither of these seem a necessary response for the scenario that's meant to trigger the alarm in this case.
Okay, so 2455-1 materializes, infected with/controlled by an SCP. This means there is a real chance in the immediate future that 2455 will contact that SCP. What do you think is the appropriate response?
Okay, so 2455-1 materializes, infected with/controlled by an SCP.
Which SCP? What are the chances that 2455 would be anywhere near said SCP anyway?
This means there is a real chance in the immediate future that 2455 will contact that SCP.
How immediate are we talking here? Also, if this is a possibility, why isn't 2455 just locked up at a remote facility far away from SCPs?
What do you think is the appropriate response?
A rather blunt one would be "render 2455 incapable of making any choices at all". Alternatively, respond to each 2455 manifestation by moving the individual somewhere that would make it impossible for the projected "choice" to occur.
I like the idea of an otherwise-normal person being thrust into the mystery and insanity of the anomalous world, but currently the article just seems sort of… float-y, to me. It's like a puzzle with pieces missing and some blank. I feel like there's the starting material here, but there's nothing solid connecting all of this.
(also, in the containment procedures, it should be "effects of another SCP". "Affects" is usually used as a verb, or refers to emotional display. Tone in general could use some work… would you mind if I made some edits to make this sound more clinical and professional?)
would you mind if I made some edits to make this sound more clinical and professional?
Go right ahead.
Okay, I'm actually pressed for time here, but tell you what—if you're up for it, I'd be willing to collaborate on this as a co-author. Your decision, and I'll send you a message with more information on collaborative work when I can.
In the meantime, I've made tone changes to about half the article. Best of luck!
To expand on this a bit, I think it's plausible for it to be affected by another SCP once. It's established that there are a lot of sites that contain multiple anomalies, and perhaps she was in one such. I would look for an existing SCP that's infectious, is contained in a regular site rather than in its own place, and contact the author to ask to use it. Afterwards, she would likely be transferred to a site where she's less likely to encounter infectious SCPs.
Mmm. Agreeing with this. I actually like most of the article, but the containment procedures don't quite work. The issue is that there is at present no reason to expect her to manifest a GoI version, given what we know (and what the Foundation had already deduced). You need to either present that reason in the article, or else take it out. I also don't think they necessarily need to administer an amnestic every time she manifested an SCP researcher variant. They've got to be recording her, so they would know if her alternate gave her any information or not.
I would perhaps suggest she has some other skills or value to the Foundation as a researcher to make the choice more plausible. The Foundation does have some history of hiring or retaining anomalies (Bright, Kain, arguably Clef), so it's not unheard of, but there should be some justification beyond "We are trying to trick her possible alternate future into manifesting." One suggestion would be to have her do something along "trusty" work, as in a prison. Alternately, have them offer to transfer her to MTF Alpha-9.
Alternately, have them offer to transfer her to MTF Alpha-9.
I'm allowed to do that?
So we've officially gotten to the point where we have doubled back entirely on recruiting random anomalies into the Foundation on the mainlist. Neat.
On the article: The concept is fairly straightforward, and with only the "will she or won't she" join the Foundation bit, there isn't a narrative that makes the concept more compelling. I feel that expanding the concept around membership in the Foundation is limiting. If she's any potential future, why not explore more novel possibilities?
On the suggestion to join the Resurrection MTF: Were the article to be adopted into that canon, (as it was specifically noted would happen for this kind of return to the old days) let it sink or swim accordingly, yes. But suggesting the article simply handwave problems by joining that MTF without clearly flagging this as Resurrection is problematic. It was supposed to be a canon, as stated by all our high-level advocates of said canon. This is recruitment of ideas supposedly unique to that canon onto the mainlist by one of its high-level advocates and I find that disturbing. There were assurances this was not "an agenda". This looks precisely like an agenda, frankly.
Abstaining from voting.
I don't know… I don't think it was that bad, I really like the core idea. It did, however, remind me a bit too much of that movie "Next" with Lord Nick Cage. I do agree with Zyn's comment but I think that after some of the points are addressed, you'll have my upvote.
No vote for now.
Edit: +1'd after the revision :)
Not that interesting of an effect, with the way it's executed. I don't know if I'd buy the idea at all, but this definitely doesn't sell me. I don't like the notion of 2455 trying to join the Foundation. Yes, that's a reasonable thing for the Foundation to test, but considering the notion isn't feasible. Not only does this person seem to have nothing to even offer, but her ability would probably hinder any decisions she makes so much more.
The narrative isn't interesting here, when we find out that this thing is a paradox? If I get that write? Because I think we have at least two humanoid paradox anomalies like this, but done more interesting and in a way that doesn't open up the "anomaly arbitrarily working for the Foundation" thing.
-1
Test 043 - 01/██/20██
Procedure: Junior Researcher ██████ suggests that if SCP-2455-1 instances are truly generated by SCP-2455, then SCP-2455 could be used as a renewable supply of 'warm bodies'.
Results: Three instances of SCP-2455-1 manifested: one in the uniform of D-class personnel, one in the uniform of Site Security, and one in the uniform of MTF-[REDACTED]. All three argued with researchers that their profession would be the most effective use of SCP-2455. Notably, the D-class version argued to SCP-2455 "it wouldn't be you dying, not really!"
Analysis: The D-class instance of SCP-2455 seemed to care little about its own fate, and SCP-2455 was visibly disturbed by this instance of SCP-2455-1.
Test 044 - 01/██/20██
Procedure: Immediately following the previous test, MTF instance of SCP-2455-1 is ordered to kill the D-class instance.
Results: MTF instance engaged D-class instance in a choke hold. D-class instance asphyxiated. SCP-2455 becomes highly distressed. The D-class instance of SCP-2455-1 dissolved as expected, and reappeared imminently afterward, proclaiming "See?" SCP-2455 shakes head frantically, and the other two instances disappear.
Analysis: SCP-2455 has become highly upset from seeing a version of itself strangle another version of itself to death. Testing halted for today.
I don't think that's addressing any concerns in this thread. If you're asking if it'll improve the article even if it doesn't address the concerns; not really. It'd probably weaken the article if anything.
I kind of like the idea of future selves manifesting to try and influence their collective "iteration zero" to realize them. However, I was more intruigued by the concept that these future selves are essentially trying to murder each other and realize themselves- think of it like the sand tiger sharks. SCP-2455 is the pregnant mother with hundreds and hundreds of eggs and fetuses, the future selves being her young that are eating each other so that only one survives.
Of course my imagination gets ahead of me. This doesn't happen; nothing happens at all here besides further explanation of the present.
Living the dream, or dreaming the life?
With the current iteration of this article (I gather it evolved a lot before I got here this morning), I have to say, I'm liking it. I particularly like the self-awareness of the last interview ("My future is either with the Foundation or locked up by the Foundation, but no, she wants to be a baker…").
+1.
Neutral voting for cool idea, would upvote with the execution soulless mentioned. Not like, specifically that, but that's more or less where I imagined it going when I was reading it and I think it's a good line of thought to pursue.
Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!
If the SCP-2455-1 instance is identified as a member of Foundation personnel and classified information is discussed in the presence of SCP-2455, SCP-2455 is to be administered a low-grade amnestic after the manifestation ceases.
Generally SCP-2455-1 instances will be observed wearing a uniform corresponding to an organization SCP-2455 is not currently affiliated with.
If you don't want this SCP to hear sensitive information, this is probably literally one of the few cases where the Foundation would be justified in employing a SCP. Light clerical duties and level 0 clearance should drop the manifestation rates of SCP-affiliated doubles to near-zero.
Gradually went from a downvote to an upvote over the course of the testing logs and interview. It was the last few lines of the interview that really sold me on it though. "To be or not to be; that is the question…"
/forum/t-1321966/scp-2455#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06
