I think the nature of the infectious properties should be specified a little. Is the infection physical, or memetic in nature? Presumably it targets males…
SCP-091-ARC / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-091-ARC
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-091-ARC.
I agree, this definitely needs some additional detail. As it is I don't quite see why the Foundation is keeping it around in the first place. Is there some particular reason it shouldn't be destroyed? It's generally better to leave things to the imagination, but you at least need to provide a jumping-off point.
I kind of like the idea of an SCP whose file doesn't contain enough information to be remotely satisfying, but a lot of the missing info can be found in other documents (see http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/incident-239-b-clef-kondraki). It adds to the sense of cohesion between articles.
… Take a good, long look at her right leg. Can you bend yours in that direction?
…Where's the rest of it?
The containment procedures indicate that this is at the very least a badass plant spore thing that will mess you up if you get too close. But the entirety of the description is literally just that this is a tree that looks a lot like a woman, doesn't do any normal plant reproductive stuff, and ohyeahitalsoinfectsyou.
Am I missing something? Or is this missing a lot?
No, this feels incomplete to me also. Plus, it feels like one of those really old SCPs that is not aging well.
SCP Wiki Senior Citizen Staff | Thank you for testing my new memetic Forum sig
This could use the referenced "Document SCP-091b" for flavor.
I felt like it was trying to say "IN PRESENCE OF MEN, WILL SEX THEM UP". But I agree it's being just a bit too obtuse as to what exactly it does to be really interesting.
(My apologies for the crude language, if that's a thing you aren't supposed to do)
Nah, you're good as far as I'm concerned. I laughed.
I'm also going to second the points that it has little content and hasn't aged well.
if your reading this your gay
Blah… I like this.. it just should have at least some detail.
Hmm, maybe if I think up something clever…
Yeah, with the tags "autonomous" "biohazard" & "contagion", it sure doesn't reference any of those things in the actual article. I like the idea of having a dryad, but this article's content is definitely lacking.
Giving bearhugs to the unsuspecting since 1872.
This is the first three (or four) SCP that I've read here in the Foundation. To be honest I felt a bit lost after reading this. Is it possible to get the original writer back here and do some improvements (adding "autonomous", "bio-hazard", and "contagion" features, like Drewbear said) about this SCP so it won't attract more downvotes?
Voting to -ARC.
Piffy is an SCP Foundation Moderator, Lv. 9001 Squishy Wizard, and Knight of the Red Pen.
Thirding the ARCing.
Voting against ARCing or deleting while Boulder takes a shot at an update.
My vote follows Quik's here. I will vote to -ARC if Boulder's rewrite flops.
I'll also provisionally reverse my vote. I'd like to see this one get salvaged.
Piffy is an SCP Foundation Moderator, Lv. 9001 Squishy Wizard, and Knight of the Red Pen.
I'd rather see it rewritten than arc'd. The picture is very good, and the containment procedures are fascinating. It's just the description that needs work.
I know I've written only one article, but maybe I can take a jab at it on the sandbox?
Can't hurt at this point. Have at it. Let me change my vote up there real quick….
I was really hoping someone would take a shot at fixing this,
Godspeed Boulder, godspeed.
Just posting to say that I'm a bit behind; lots of work both in and out of school. Sorry. I'll probably be done tomorrow night.
It's a good picture, and a well-written containment protocol, but beyond that… I got nothin'.
I still think that either the other effects of the object, as seen in this, should be added to make this one a little more interesting, or it should just be -ARC'd. I don't think anyone's working on a rewrite at the moment.
/forum/t-93831/scp-091-arc#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06