SCP by Series
Other SCP
Feed
Stories
Discovery
Random
Reposted entirely after making a bunch of goofy posting mistakes. Haven't written a skip in awhile. I'm looking forward to feedback. Thanks for reading.
Images created by me. These images replace previous images that were not in compliance with SCP wiki licensing policies. It's good, actually, because I like these a lot better.
Was writing a comment when the other one got deleted, needless to say I was a bit surprised when it wouldn't save. Anyway, got a couple things to say.
Some nitpicks: the blacked out names of locations at the beginning of the description are a bit of an eyesore, but I suppose they're there so one won't be able to figure out the area code. I don't think designating the guy from the first test log as SCP-6579-2 was necessary, as he isn't part of the anomaly and only appears in that one test log (which there's at least 190 of, going off the naming). Actually, I don't see the point of including the first test log at all, as the fact that most of the predictions are true could've been just as easily stated in the description, and it only distracts from the second test log.
And speaking of the second log… Wow, I did not expect that at all! Very heavy and hard to read, which I suppose was the intended effect. Just the first paragraph is disturbing by itself, the fact that the Foundation put a person through that (even by her own volition) is just horrible. I like that you left the nature of SCP-6579-1 vague, I can't even decide if it's one single entity or if there's one for every person calling.
So yeah, this was an enjoyable read, even though I can't say I felt good going through it.
Thank you so much for reading and for your comments. I see your point with the first test log. I think my goal was to show the contrast between what the researchers wanted to do and what the ethics committee would allow, but I get that it’s not as important as the other. I also see your point about naming that guy a -2.
Thank you for the excellent feedback!
This is the first time I’ve enjoyed an SCP this much in awhile. This is really good, so many of the lines really give you a gut punch. +1.
I really, really want to +1 this SCP. The concept is interesting, and the final log is really, really good. There's some parts of it that put me off too much for me to be ready to +1 it, though. So here's my complaints:
"All mental health periodicals and websites are to be monitored for instances of SCP-6576 phone numbers and immediately removed or destroyed." the way this is worded makes it sound like they're destroying the health periodicals/websites themselves rather than just the SCP-6576 advertisements. I presume this is not the case, particularly for the full websites, as taking an entire website down sounds a bit too disruptive.
My main gripe and what really puts me off from upvoting this article is the first log. It's such a nothing segment. Sure, it reinforces the idea that the voice on the other end is telling the truth, but it doesn't do so in an interesting or compelling way. It's incredibly vague with no description of what he was told beyond that it had a positive impact on the people around him or what impact his death actually did end up having. The 93% bit especially bugs me, as that's quantitative measurement applied to something that can only be accurately described in a qualitative way. How do you measure 93% accuracy in what it says? Were 93% of its claims proven true? Were its overarching claims mostly true but 7% off somehow? It doesn't really make sense as a way to measure that. While I appreciate that this part doesn't get too into it or go on for too long so as to harm the pacing, especially with how powerful the following segment is, I think it's much too vague and needs some improvement.
As for the 2nd log, while I overall really liked it, I'm unsure why they deemed her becoming suicidally depressed and being at severe risk to be worth information from an interview with the anomaly, especially when they can evidently quite easily tap into other callers. I also don't really like the handwaving of how she got hold of the gun with a simple 'it is unclear', especially when the implication seems to be that they were taking great care to keep her from acquiring anything to hurt herself with before the test so she wouldn't be able to kill herself before it started. These issues aren't too major, and I can definitely handwave them for how impactful the log was, but I do think it has some edges that could be sanded down for a nicer presentation.
I hope my critique made sense, I've been super sick and out of it lately.
I really appreciate this critique. I see people's point on the first log and I'm on the verge of cutting it out.
As a former stats teacher, I get the irritation at the quantitative vs qualitative, but I actually find that blurring kind of fun. But I respect the kind of math brain that would respond to that with grit teeth. :)
As for why they would do the second log, I think her being insecure about the impact she's made, her value as an employee, and her desire for advancement would compel her to take that risk. Furthermore, as someone with mental illness who is in the mental health field, there is a drive to understand, to examine and to dissect mental illness in a way that is most likely an attempt to understand oneself. As she is someone with severe depression, she has most likely contemplated suicide at some point in her past and as such may be especially intrigued and invested in exploring such an anomaly.
I think the first log serves a valuable narrative purpose in establishing the truthfulness of the anomaly's words to some extent, it's just so vague that it doesn't do it in a very compelling way.
As for the second log, I was more referring to why the Foundation would perform the experiment than why the assistant researcher would volunteer for it.
Based on feedback, I've reworked the first log. I'd love to hear what people think.
I thought it was neat that a part of the -1's prediction came true because of the Foundation's own involvement. Kinda reminds me of the way time travel in a fixed timeline works, and I love that sort of stuff in fiction. However, I still have a problem with the log as a whole.
The main thing is that just the notion of a person's suicide having positive consequences doesn't sound right to me. Yes, I know some people are horrible, but the thing is that most people with suicidal tendencies wrongly believe themselves to be horrible people, which is part of why they decide to kill themselves. I didn't really think about it when this was mentioned in the article in passing, but now that there's a whole log about it, it's a problem that's really hard to ignore. The Subject isn't even stated to be a bad person. And even if he was, I still think that this goes against the whole message of the article - the final log covers some heavy stuff, but it's still hopeful and ends on an uplifting note.
Now that I'm thinking about it, this also breaks the logistics of the anomaly: -1 stated that it's painful to be wherever it is, and it obviously wants to prevent the callers from killing themselves, so why would it even talk about the supposed positive consequences? I know it's predictions are almost a hundred percent accurate, but it could omit mentioning those and instead talk about the pain and decay like they are stated to be doing. Or, you know, other negative consequences. Because there are always negative consequences to committing suicide.
Basically, this just doesn't sit right with me. You don't have to change the article again if you don't want to, as this is just my thoughts on the subject, and maybe other people won't look at it the way I do.
Let me chew on this a bit. I think why I originally included this was to cloud the intentions of the SCP from simply being something positive, but I'm hearing on this. I'm going to let it boil in my brain for a bit. Thank you so much for this feedback.
Wow. This is really heavy stuff and possibly one of the most intriguing premises I've seen in a very long time. The countless ethical implications of both the anomaly and the Foundation's experimentation methods are super interesting. What you have here is more than enough for an upvote, but I do really wish there was more because there's limitless potential you could've explored with this concept. Keep it up!
- Premise is S-tier
- I like how precise yet natural you are with the technical terms
- Worldbuilding is really cool (i.e., weaponized depressants gave me MK Ultra vibes, imagery of the people on the other side)
- There are areas of the article that are a bit difficult to read (specifically the last ~3 paragraphs of the description)
- I strongly dislike Dr. Sandler's parts in the last log. It's unnecessary and clichéd which detracts from the rest of the dialogue that you wrote really well. I think if it were changed to be less 'Series-1 hardo doctor' to i.e., something more subtle/understandable to the situation, he'd fit in the story more.
As for Sandler, that’s fair. I started writing these close to Series 1, so I definitely still bring that vibe to things. I also wanted him to reinforce her feelings she wasn’t good enough by criticizing her often.
And yes. I’n quite proud of my “weaponized depressants.” :)
Thank you so much for your feedback and I’m glad you enjoyed it!
