Creation of 541
I wanted to build on the "Neutralized" category, this one just sort of came to me—bizarre, not harmful, and ultimately destroyed in a careless accident. Also, I love 914. What can I say.
SCP-541 / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-541
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-541.
Huh. Interesting. Not threatening, but definitely creepy.
A researcher killed an SCP organism and was merely made into a grunt? Shouldn't he have been fired for incompetence or something?
They still have useful skills and could make a decent low-level employee, so there's no need to get rid of them entirely.
The part of this that bothers me, though, is this:
Document #541-19: During continued "growth" testing SCP-541 goes into arrest and cannot be revived. Following its "death," the remains of SCP-541 dissolve into a fine powder within minutes. Cultures stagnate and no clones of SCP-541 are produced.
Addendum: Lab technician #██-███ administered a drug dose appropriate for a normal human being of the age, height, weight and fitness of SCP-541, as determined by tests recounted in Document #541-12 and 13. This proved fatal to SCP-541 as the subject was not a complete organism and the dosage should have been adjusted accordingly. Technician was reprimanded and moved to bottom-level duties with restricted opportunities for advancement and promotion.
Did it die twice or something?
if your reading this your gay
I think the first death is just like a death report while the addendum is explaining why it died, it's still pretty stupid but that's my take on it. Sure, they could be useful for paperwork but they kind of killed a one-of-a-kind specimen and they did so in a really stupid fashion ("how was I supposed to know that the organs didn't count as a full bodied individual?")
An alternative to 914 is the 'what-does-it-do-to-dead-things?' goo.
But that's probably just as advisable as using 914.
I like the idea of adding to the neutralized category and I like the SCP overall, but the way it is worded as "The scp was…" in the past tense, seems abit off, it should be written as a regular report and then olny indicated that its dead in the addendums and the category, I dont think the Foundation would go back and re-write the whole article to be in past tense just because it was neutralized.
(account deleted)I'm confused…Shouldn't this be in the "Decommissioned SCP's" section? I mean, it's dead…
Neutralized =/= Decommissioned. From my rewrite of the SCP object class guide, here is what each is and why they're different.
Neutralized: No object with an SCP designation is categorized as Anomalous, but some SCP objects were once categorized as Anomalous before being assigned an SCP designation.
Decommissioned: Reserved for objects that are not only destroyed, but disavowed by the Foundation.
Hope this clears up your confusion.
Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!
The article felt alright until the browbeating and demotion of the researcher involved in the mistake that led to its death. Though the SCP does set out to try and Protect anomalous objects, researchers are given leeway to end countless numbers of human lives each month. Though it certainly warrants a serious reprimand, I don't see how the death of this thing warrants reducing a person to a grunt, and certainly don't see why the actual SCP file would note that.
I can only say…meh. Sorry, it doesn't hook me at all.
/forum/t-81259/scp-541#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06
