SCP Staff Save Everyone From Lawsuit By Deleting Wiki
NEWS/OPINION — “A lawsuit could honestly happen at any second. This way, we have beaten them to the punch.” (source)
In a shocking move, the SCP Wiki Staff announced via O5 Command today that it would be taking down the entirety of the SCP Wiki, voluntarily.
In the original post of the hotly-assented thread, a Staff member wrote:
“The Wiki is so strongly cemented as an icon of the project, the universe, and the community. It’s necessary to ensure full licensing compliance on the wiki, and avoid potential liabilities which could seriously harm one of the largest collections of Creative Commons media on the internet.
It is our moral duty to get out in front of any potential legal trouble. We had an extensive discussion in Staffchat about it, and we ensured that the Recap team will make self-referential jokes about it. We then came to the conclusion that the best thing to do for the Wiki is to erase it completely before anything bad can happen. To US.
Let’s be honest here, we’re pretty damn important. Every m█████f█████ wants a piece of this ass. We have a legal — and moral — obligation to remove the SCP Wiki from any potential danger. It’s what’s best for the Wiki.”
— (source)
The SCP Wiki has had its share of legal heat. First there was Fishmonger, then there was the Russian branch crisis, and most recently the Andrei Duksin loss in court. The PTSD of these events have led to some needed, sober revaluations and introspective assessments of the SCP Wiki, and what is best for it in a world gone mean and litigious.
Staffchat leaks obtained exclusively by this outlet reveal the moments of the move:
[STAFF MEMBER REDACTED BY THREAT OF CANCEL CULTURE]: Guys. I just woke up. I was having a dream that Andrei Duksin and Fishmonger were conjoined twins who kidnapped me to place me at the center of a court room that was also a circus. The judge, for some reason an anthropomorphic walrus, from a bench that was an ocean liner for an odder reason, kept reading SCPs out loud, one by one, as if they were heinous crimes. The worse part was that he did it in numerical order! Starting from SCP-002!! Nobody reads the Wiki that way! At least start at the SCP-001s so I can read Dr McDoctorate Placeholder’s 10th proposal, entitled “So Patapysical, It’s Just the CSS Theme’s Code Typed Out, Go Fuck Yourself”. I tried to explain that anomalies should serve narratives, not the other way around, but the judge put me in contempt of court and gave my IP address to Kufat.
[WE ARE HIDING THIS NAME TO BETTER SERVE THE WIKI]: We need an uber-emergencies SCP Wiki Staff meeting in our Super-DUPER-Hidie-Hole Secret “No Plebs Allowed” Chat right now. RECAP TEAM NOT ALLOWED.”
Recap team, later repeating the Admin’s consensus account of the matter, wrote in its January 2022 report that the conversation took place “over 83 consecutive hours”, and accounted for a staggering 1% of all messages sent in S-D-HH-S-NPA Chat (which has over 5 million lines of chat per year for ~13 years). Here is Recap’s account:
Staff discusses how awful it would be if this actually happened, despite no precedent. HarryBlank sighs. HarryBlank is a PhD. You should all know that he has an expensive piece of paper that says he is smart. Suddenly, there is a rapping at the 4th wall. Who is it, I ask in a jovially recursive manner? It’s just me from the future, laughing at your wit and jokes. Oh OK. Keep up the great work you lovably irreverent bastard. Thanks, I will.
Numerous members identify right-wing (synonymous with “alt” right-wing), bad-faith, negative-value people —namely Sheldon Adelson or Foster Friess — that have the monetary arsenal to sue the Wiki, and who likely hate it because it is so smart, anti-fash, and LGBTQ+ tolerant, and might turn their great, great grandchildren trans.
The conversation then saunters with a somberness quite unlike the flippant frolicking of Recap Team member HarryBlank in the direction of possible motive on the part of these homophobes. While they are on the subject, they wonder if -ES (the Spanish branch) might sue them first.
It is overwhelmingly concluded that given the Wiki doesn’t produce any revenue or have any real money ([STAFF MEMBER REDACTED SO THAT JUSTICE MAY BE AVERTED] notes “… besides all that sweet dough we gathered for the Duksin lawsuit loss babeeee, can you believe no one has demanded receipts for that shit?! WOOO CANCUN!”). Despite this, the answer from all involved was a resounding “yes, we will be sued”. [ABSOLVED FROM AND HIGHER THAN ALL CRITICISM] reminds all in attendance that “Gahdamn, everybody want us so damn bad.” The whole staff grumble and humpf in a chorus of guttural self-congratulation and assumed importance, and HarryBlank has a PhD.
— (source)
A Staff member who wishes to remain anonymous in fear of their entire social life added:
“We can’t have people who disagree with our politics have the last laugh over our Wiki. This is the only real way to ensure that.
Additionally, we know the ins and outs of the legal standing of the site, thanks to our half-racoon, half-hyena, half-crow, half-man, half-child. I think keeping our promise about resisting using vague ideas of boogeymen is the best cour — WE STOLE SCP-173 AND THEN TOLD OTHER PEOPLE THEY COULDN’T, OK?! FOR YEARS!! OH GOD THE GUILT!! THE WHOLE WIKI IS BASED ON INTELLECTUAL THEFT!! WE RUSHED TO FIND IZUMI KATO AND MOTO42 TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO GIVE US PERMISSION TO MAKE IT ALL OK LIKE 5 YEARS AND 2000 SCPS INTO IT, PRECISELY WHEN WE STARTED TO REALIZE WHAT A LEGAL MESS WE GOT OURSELVES INTO!! BUT IT’S ALL A LIEEEEE! SHELDON IS COMING FOR US!! RUN!!! RUUUUUUNNN!!!”
— (source)
Some Staff raised the concern that the outer fandom wouldn’t understand the legal sensitivities raised or the cultural nuance necessitating Staff members to do this, and Staff hand-waved the concerns, calling such individuals “Series 1 lovers” and to “go make their own with blackjack and hookers, where a thing can just do a thing.” Others noted that erasing the cultural icon would doubtless be interpreted as just the next move in the perceived, slow erasure of the site in the name of virtue signaling over outlandish concerns which are truly meant not to achieve any result, but to communicate and project a false persona of insight and intelligence. These criticisms were determined to be bullying by popular Staff vote, and those individuals who voiced them were banned on account of disagreeing with Staff.
Non-Staff critics have also voiced concerns that the decision is irrational and comes down to the paranoia and unjustified wants of just a few people, who have elected themselves the ethical representatives of a massive and diverse community, wider in scope than the narrow-mindedness of their partisan thoughts. In addressing the criticisms, the Captain of the PR Team stated:
“First of all, it’s “Community Outreach” and “Internet Outreach”, not “PR Team”. Second, that narrative about us destroying the Wiki, everything central to it, all that came before us, all that gives us reason to assume so so much moral authority and responsibility for ourselves… that’s just a bigoted and racist conspiracy theory. Plus, it is mean, and we have a rule against being mean.
I see you are wearing socks. Are you a bigot racist conspiracy theory? (Interviewer: “What? No…”) I know a neo-Nazi dogwhistle when I see one. (Interviewer: “How are socks neo-Nazi?”) Don’t act like you don’t know. This interview is over, bigot.”
A separate news team was able to inquire further, and have kindly shared the transcript with us… though strangely, they don’t recall the conversation:
[STAFF MEMBER’S RESPONSIBILITY REDACTED]: “Well we permaban those kinds of people on sight and censor anything they have to say.
Interviewer: But haven’t you said silence is violence?
[RESPONSIBILITY REDACTED]: Haha yeah. Unrelatedly, there was no dissent or disagreement over the decision to erase the Wiki; it had unanimous support! Unanimous! So, how wrong could it be?
Interviewer: But why now? The Wiki has been around for 13 years, isn’t is safe to believe that something would have happened by now?
[I SHOULDN’T BE CRITICIZED]: No, no, you can never let the idea of a threat be eased, otherwise you don’t have the contrast to seem like the heroes. Besides, we owe it to the fans to not delay anything beyond what is absolutely necessary, and this has been delayed for a long time.
Interviewer: On that note, it seems as though one of your Administrators is still not censured for something done in November 2020; is the potential lawsuit in the future more pressing than holding your actual, tangible leaders accountable for things long past?
[I, A LEADER, WILL HIDE MY OWN IDENTITY]: Well, we thought about that, but if we successfully take down the whole Wiki, that point is finally moot. We thought about advertising it as a way to kill two birds with one stone, sure.
Interviewer: Remember when the Wiki raised it age limit in the wake of the underage sex scandal?
[LEADERS SHOULD ONLY BE GIVEN COMPLIMENTS]: Uhh… can we cut… are you from KiwiFarms?
Interviewer: Remember how it was sort of seen like just a lazy attempt to ineffectually wash the Staff’s hands of any wrongdoing or responsibility? One that didn’t really fix the issue and was rushed out of fear?
[HERDS ALWAYS SCAMPER IN UNANIMOUS DIRECTION]: … Next question or we end this right now.
Interviewer: Remember when you said that you couldn’t erase 3% of the Wiki’s articles because of the damage a gaping hole in the established universe like that would cause? And how you did this against the wishes of the author at the time, and now you are citing the wishes of the author as your moral duty?
[NO ONE WILL REMEMBER OUR CONTRADICTIONS]: Removing the image ackkkktually helps us a lot now. We want everything on the wiki to be legally spotless, wothout [sic (this is not a typo, the Staff member literally pronounced it “woth”)] exception. This, sadly, includes the entire Wiki.
Interviewer: Will such an important decision be determined by user vote this time, like it was last time?
[WE ONLY DEPLOY SUCH TACTICS WHEN WE ARE SURE THE RESULTS WILL BE WHAT WE WANT]: We only deploy such tactics when we are sure the results will be what we want. … wait, what?
Interviewer: If you take down the Wiki out of fear that it will be abused legally, doesn’t that prematurely hand the victory to the bad actors without even so much as a fight?
[I AM IN AN EMOTIONAL DAYCARE]: It is clear that, while Sheldon Adleson doesn’t want to sue us, BUT he could change his mind AT ANY SECOND.
Interviewer: Sheldon Adleson is dead.
[I WILL REACT TO ALMOST ANYTHING AS IF YOU JUST OFFERED METH TO TODDLERS]: One of our Chat Staffers says that’s misinformation. So we’re going to have to ban you. Don’t direct message us again, DMs are harassment, what is wrong with you? You shouldn’t be allowed to write to your representatives if you aren’t going to praise them.
Oh, and now that you are reputationally assassinated by way of our public gallows, and no one will give you the time of day because we arbitrarily say you are evil, I can tell you something that no one will believe: we’ve really milked the popularity of the SCP Wiki to flatter our victim-complexes for all it’s worth, and frankly this is just the only thing left. Gotta get that dopamine high somehow, and even upvotes lose their edge eventually my guy! Ciao! Don’t let the amnestic hit you on the way out.
Prior to noticing that we were all wearing socks, the Captain of the Licensing Team — the one whose reputation will always be associated with this decision as long as they are recalled — offered a statement to us:
“But maybe even more important, however, is that it’s the right thing to do. As a creative community, the rights of an artist are incredibly important for us, and late as it is, it’s still better to fix this now than never.”
— (source)
