SCP-222 / Discussion

This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-222.

page 1 of 3123next »

Dragon of Life 09 Mar 2009 13:32

Some thoughts for further testing:

What does SCP-158 produce when a clone is the subject? Conversely, does a 158 subject's clone possess the capacities extracted by 158, or is it a vegetative lump as well?

Does the clone of a person augmented by SCP-212 retain the improvements? Do any body-altering SCPs have their effects carried over?

Re:

Kain Pathos Crow 09 Mar 2009 14:10

Well, with regards to 158, it produces a "soul" as well, as they are people, merely copies of them. There are some slight differences between the subjects, but primarily, its almost identically the same soul. And it becomes a vegetative lump as well.

But that's just because of 158.

I'm not sure about the other question, because I didn't write this, but the coffin seems to reject inorganic components, so I'm guessing if the altered effects are organic in nature then they would be carried on. But then again, maybe not.

Dr_Fawkes 15 Feb 2011 17:57

Reading it again, this sort of seems too purely useful to be a proper SCP.

Robert Sandler 15 Feb 2011 21:30

I have more of a problem with the tone, myself.

RJB_R 19 Jun 2012 04:01

I really don't like this one. It has weird old article formatting, and it's too useful. the fact that it doesn't really do anything creepy or interesting beyond "making clones" doesn't help much.

---

Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!

Hurtz 19 Jun 2012 04:31

Well, other than the article almost outright saying that the clones have some mental issues, there are undocumented clones working for the Foundation now, and at least one clone attempting to replace his original.

Eskobar 06 Jul 2012 13:34

So if there's a containment breach, they're gonna have to run around and round up the level 3 personnel to contain it? Because I suppose nobody else will ever need to know things about the SCP. Downvoted because of bad reasoning on that front, because of unusual formatting (SCPs have addenda called addenda, not "History," "Function," etc.), because it's useful-except-TWIST, and because of shitty expungement, especially towards the end.

This could use a rewrite, but it's not very good right now. Concept good, execution bad.

Inconsequential 10 Sep 2012 17:20

Clone marking procedures need to be updated. If all a clone needs to do is cover his "C" tattoo with makeup it's not a very secure identification system.

firewoven 10 Sep 2012 17:41

My god. The tone was awful. As was the formatting.

Inb4 called for review.

The Tinker 06 Nov 2012 20:23

Down-voted primarily due to the large lack of redacted and expunged information. Dates and locations should be covered, as well as which O5 Operative gave orders regarding the SCP, as is usual for such articles. Suggest adding at least one expunged incident regarding clones.

Other main issue noted is the usage of tattoos to identify clones. This is quite honestly ridiculous, given that a tattoo can easily be covered. Suggest using GPS tracking devices as well as RFID implants.

(account deleted) 06 Nov 2012 21:06

Down-voted primarily due to the large lack of redacted and expunged information. Dates and locations should be covered, as well as which O5 Operative gave orders regarding the SCP, as is usual for such articles. Suggest adding at least one expunged incident regarding clones.

No, dates and locations should not be covered. That is entirely at the discretion of the author, and many times there is no reason to withhold that information. Also, there is no official protocol for redacting information concerning O5. This is especially ridiculous because they already have code names.

Unnecessary redaction is one of the biggest reasons people will downvote articles around here. Lurk moar.

AdminBright 07 Nov 2012 06:48

Son, you have had your advice giving abilities revoked. Adding useless expungements or redacteds is NEVER the answer. And Authors black box things at their own choice, not just 'cause. Don't try and give advice about things of which you know nothing.

---

Admin, SCP Wiki

HammerMaiden 28 Jun 2013 20:49

This one has a couple tonal issues due to its age, but the implications and the Foundation abuse of it are actually realistic and interesting to me. So I'll leave my +1 where it is.

…that's funny, actually. Because I didn't think I'd read this one before. …Did I say funny? I meant creepy as hell.

Amo387 09 Nov 2013 13:15

Other main issue noted is the usage of tattoos to identify clones. This is quite honestly ridiculous, given that a tattoo can easily be covered. Suggest using GPS tracking devices as well as RFID implants.

I do agree with those points, but still gets my upvote. I know it's a little old now, but think that part could be updated. Some sort of tattoo would probably be good for at-a-glance identification, though I don't know how I feel about a simple "C" being the tattoo. Also, probably not in as noticeable a place, depending on what they're having the clones do. Research assistant in a lab all day? Would probably work to have it on the forehead. Filling out an MTF (if they use them for such)? Not so much.

AndarielHalo 25 Nov 2013 18:57

We've found the source of our D-Class population

Mixem 02 Jan 2014 15:01

Except for the "24 clones a day" limit and the incredibly costly transportation fees of hundreds of D-class population each month, assuming that the Foundation staffs it 24 hours a day. I'm not saying it wouldn't work if we implemented it, its just alot cheaper and easier to just pluck inmates out of death row and homeless people off the streets.

Last edited on 02 Jan 2014 15:02 by Mixem Show more

page 1 of 3123next »