Oversimplified SCP - Ch. 121 - SCP-4999

[HellifIknow]

@Flooff They have an ethics committee after certain.....procedures were created. Though they constantly butt heads with the scientists.

 

[Kizuro]

I truly wish that I would meet him soon

 

[Jergens]

I could have swore this scp had an earlier number, like 2000s series

 

[mem]

@hellifiknow the pedophile procedures or the furry *non-consentual sex* ones?

 

[Xer0sama]

@Floof
Hell, the Ethics Committee is the only authority with over the O5 Council.
The O5s decide what's safe, the Ethics Committee decide what's acceptable.

 

[Confused]

when did scp care about ethics?

 

[abbers]

@Shitposter42 so part of The Foundation is to understand things yes, but it's often moreso to keep it contained like SCP-1111 with the dog and the tree. As 1111 is, it's understood well enough to keep it contained and that disturbing the site could produce more dangerous—but ever worse, unknown—effects. 4999 is effectively self-contained and it shows no hazardous anomalies. If anything, as long as it's within an understandable range, it's okay. Possibly interfering with 4999 might cause something bad—or again, unknown—to occur and create even more problems

 

[username99900]

Why is it Keter, it's so kind. It cares for others who are alone.

 

[Petnavis]

@username99900 Classification is based on the ability to contain the SCP i.e. a spoon that teleports every 10 minutes and glows would be keter but a monster that kills everything it sees but can be contain by petting it every hour would not be keter.

 

[Zaldun]

honestly i loooooooove this scp, wonder how far the article itself goes into it

 

[SymmbolZ]

scp-4999 is like that cool uncle who doesn't show up much in your life, but is like always there to support you when you need it.

 

[sneezebag]

manly wholesome for a keter

 

[mikoreimu]

@hellifiknow wasnt the ethic committee created because of dr. bright ?

 

[sirporthos]

@username99900 Keter classification means that its uncontainable. Not necessarily dangerous.

 

[AfterMidnightMoon]

Having some random guy smoking beside you on your deathbed doesn't seem comforting.

 

[HellifIknow]

@AfterMidnightMoon Well to be fair, if you're in a position where you're going to die alone. You don't got much choice on who will be by your side in those last few moments.

 

[malborlin]

@demomanowar ease of containment makes much more sense than the weird nonspecific combination of containability/potential danger that the class specification used to represent. splitting it into separate, standardized categories is more consistent, and fits better with what a scientific organization's goals should be: to collect as much useful data as possible.

also lol at your argument that the new system is bad because it takes one sentence to explain. if you hate reading so much, SCPs probably aren't for you

 

[Demomanowar]

@malborlin
The locked box classification was so clear and consistent that they had to invent a new four-pronged system detailing the containment risk, veil-breaking potential, and personal risk of being near the object. Because, you see, locked box didn't mean jack shit, and they knew it.
.
You could very well say the same is true of classic Safe/Euclid/Keter, but by the simple virtue of it being purposefully vague, it didn't hit such a problem of being standardized and consistent. And might as well - that is not what the Foundation is meant to be. At the start, it was just a collection of weird artifacts being kept by a nebulous, unknowable organisation. And even now that the SCP foundation has been thoroughly explained and established through thousands of "tales", the utter clusterfuck of conflicting canons means that a standardized notation holds no more credence than 035 telling you you're doing a terrific job.

 

[malborlin]

@demomanowar containment risk, veil-breaking potential, and personal risk are all useful metrics to keep track of -- and distinguish from each other -- when dealing with things like SCPs. but honestly, it seems like your real complaint isn't with the classification system so much as the fact that the site itself has changed over the years, and that's just a natural consequence of people continuing to use it. you can only write so many articles about teleporting old men and transmogrification machines before wanting to try something new.

the only way to prevent the canon (such as it exists) from becoming a convoluted mess would have been to lock the site around 2011 and ban all new articles entirely. what the foundation was "meant to be" in your view isn't really relevant, and trying to impose that view on newcomers who don't share your attachment to the way things used to be won't improve anyone's experience with the site. it's just introducing unnecessary drama over what is ultimately a stylistic preference.

I agree that the old articles are good, but they're all still there, and they're still the ones most people will see first when they're introduced to the site. (if you google "best SCP articles" expect to see a lot of 173, 106, 682 etc.) the only difference is now there are more options. people can read your favorite curated creepypastas and walk away satisfied, or they can stick around and see what's new, and personally, I like what they've done with the place.

 

[SeveViola]

@malborlin @Demomanowar wat?