I have no business doing a Bright's Challenge for my second SCP. I probably did a million things wrong, but I'm going in with both feet first.
EDIT: I want to make very clear that I took this image myself.
SCP-1999 / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-1999
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-1999.
No, no. It's "Lowe's." They sell home-improvement supplies.
(just kidding, upvoted)
I liked it, but you could have integrated the "Are We Cool Yet" reference a little less forcibly. regardless, I upvoted.
Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!
I'm open to suggestions. Like Lumancer said, it is kind of tacked-on, in that I just had the idea that fucking with the Foundation like this would be something AWCY would do, and ran with it. That's what I like about GOIs, and this is my first time trying to use one.
Maybe I missed something, but how exactly does this classify as Euclid? it just seems like the objects produce a feeling that you do not own the object even if you do.
So where's the danger?
Object class refers to difficulty in containment. These spontaneously appear at sporadic times and locations, so euclid is accurate.
This is so out there I had to upvote.
Even though the AWCY? reference feels a little tacked-on, I think that works for the motif established for them as a group so far; they seem so far more focused on attaching their name to pre-existing work than creating things of their own.
I don't get the impression that they're slapping their name on things just for publicity's sake- most of the AWCY objects I can think of were repurposed with clear goals and/or messages in mind (the original example being Ossify Wallstreet"). I'm not seeing thah here, hence my confusion.
Wait, does any instance of "Loewes" written on an object with ball-point pen or felt-tip pen, in the style of Mrs. Elfa S. Loewes' handwriting, cause the anomalous effect?
The short answer is no. But you know, the original Addendum 1999-a detailed how the phenomenon came to the Foundation's attention, with the name showing up on test material for an SCP, at which point the researcher goes, "I can't use this, it's Elfie's!" Security footage and a guard stationed on site showed that the item never left the researcher's hand.
Then I decided to tighten focus and just have it affect museum objects instead of anything, and so the Addendum and the explanation went by the wayside. It would have cleared that question up. I should probably put that into the description, though, that would be a good idea. But, they just show up; that's the phenomenon. This has been your long answer.
Okay, I was wondering about that too… It does make more sense for it to be happening spontaniously than to actually be controllable; otherwise, AWCY would've probably just gone up to the White House and spray-painted "Loewes" on it already. …Which they seem to be trying anyway.
The limitation to museum objects also renders moot a different question I had: What if the name appeared on a person's skin? Would they consider themselves to be her property or something?
That would be weird, but even in the original draft, it was limited to objects.
AWCY I see as saying, "Well, you took our shit, so we're gonna take everyone else's shit, only we don't care about material possessions, so let this lady have it." Exactly how much they know about the Foundation, or even the SCP (they either don't know how it works or are just using it as a symbol) is left as an exercise for the reader.
/forum/t-460526/scp-1999#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06
