Document 130-1 / Discussion

This is the discussion related to the wiki page Document 130-1.

Okay, then...

MisterFlames 30 Apr 2010 22:08

For those of you who are interested in what the Post Office delivers, I've started a little list. I plan on building on it, of course, but treat this as an Experiment Log, should you come up with an interesting idea for a parcel. I ask that people hold to the following rules.

• Please do not mail SCPs through the Post Office: I have tried to avoid the idea of the Post Office generating SCPs, although I do reserve the right to change my mind.
• Run ideas past the writers of particular Avatars: I did ask Clef and Rights, and I'll probably ask others, too. It's just common courtesy.

The missives can be from the past and the future (or possible futures), and I believe they should hold personal touches for people. It's a game of psychology, what would be an interesting thing to happen to a person, either wonderful or hideous?

Just remember that the Foundation isn't going to deliver it, unless it's absolutely vital.

Have fun!

MisterBibs 01 May 2010 04:30

Wow, the Rights one really depressed me.

Whats your 'design space' for these things? Should they scare / please the people who get them? Do the people usually get the mail?

MisterFlames 01 May 2010 10:41

For the record, Rights approved the idea when I proposed it to her. She's entertainingly evil that way.

The letters should be noteworthy, that's really all I ask of them. And the letters should not be delivered in most cases. The ones that are, well, they would have to be vital to the interests of the Foundation.

But just imagine how depressing a dead letter office could be, especially if it could strive to deliver.

Hm

Voct 01 May 2010 13:04

Which do you think would be more depressing for letters to Dr Bright?

a) Letters to the original Bright from his family?

or

b) Letters to the original owners of Bright's bodies, from their families?

Re: Hm

MisterFlames 01 May 2010 19:34

Honestly, the former. The latter would be undeliverable, since they wouldn't be addressed to Bright, and those bodies wouldn't be named, but D-class numbers.

Re: Hm

Photosynthetic 03 May 2010 05:20

What would the Foundation do with letters addressed to D-class?

Re: Hm

MisterFlames 04 May 2010 02:34

Good question, Photo. The answer would probably be, "Check them for interest, then dispose of them."

Rather like what they do with D-class, no?

Re: Hm

Photosynthetic 04 May 2010 04:28

Heh. Good answer.

Re: Hm

MisterFlames 05 May 2010 06:04

I have my moments. <grin>

Clarification

Voct 01 May 2010 13:55

"Do not mail SCPs through the Post Office" - does this mean:

a) do not send new SCPs through the Post Office?

or

b) do not send things for already-contained SCPs through the Post Office?

Re: Clarification

Leicontis 01 May 2010 14:28

I suspect he means (a), since SCPs that generate other SCPs are frowned upon, but (b) would also require a high standard, given the general policy against articles that reference other SCPs.

Re: Clarification

MisterFlames 01 May 2010 18:11

Thank you, Leicontis, that's precisely what I meant. That, and I do believe articles should have a measure of self-sufficiency.

Now mail concerning other SCPs I could see, but they would need to be exceptional and not break the other article. Mailing an instruction manual to Dr. Gears about SCP-914, for instance, is right out. Same with dealing with SCP-682, really.

I personally think the noteworthy mail would have a sort of emotional resonance about it. A lot of the mail that appears would be almost literally junk mail, just like the mail that shows up in your own mail boxes. The Foundation would just glance over it to see if there was anything of interest, then dispose of it.

Communism will win 21 Dec 2012 18:06

Yeah… I think this would be a lot better if it was A) using personnel that aren't already overrepresented on the site (so either made-up people or some of the lesser-known existing characters), and B) expanded significantly.

Keep Dr. King though, that never gets old.

---

if your reading this your gay

katiekawaii 06 Aug 2014 05:31

I'm so sad this never grew! Someone should take on the project of adding to it.

YourBuddyBill 03 Feb 2015 04:49

Someone really does need to add to this.
I should mark it but my writing quality has been garbage lately.

Heartful 03 Feb 2015 04:57

I don't think anyone but the author can add to this since it doesn't have the "collaboration" tag.

---

LilyFlower is cute and amazing <3

YourBuddyBill 03 Feb 2015 17:40

Oops, derp.
Not sure if Mister Flames is still around, but I hope he is.

TheMM 20 Jan 2019 19:46

You know I wonder if there's something we can do about this. As seen by the top post MisterFlames had intended for this Document to be a collaboration but had neglected to put the "collaboration" tag on it.
MisterFlames hasn't done anything since 2017, so contact may be difficult but I was curious if we can actually make this a "collaboration" post since it was meant to be one or if we can't do anything about it.

MaliceAforethought 05 Feb 2020 10:00

Not staff, but I've done it anyway, since the intent here was undeniable and nothing's been done about the issue for over half a decade. Hopefully it'll get more attention now.

cybersqyd 05 Feb 2020 10:54

I'm noting here that this change was made about 3 months ago and reverted by staff: it might be worth checking this with the tech team to make sure it's okay (since this being collaborative does seem very much to be intended)?

Last edited on 05 Feb 2020 10:55 by cybersqyd Show more