SCP Foundation - Creepypasta with roid rage - now ITT: SCP fans

[HIVidaBoheme]

If your doxxed address was wrong, why would you admit that? Pure smugness? That’s like “correcting” a heat-seeking missile away from decoy flares. Either the addresses are correct, or they aren’t and these are some real dumb people.

Basically this:


Now what conversations must be going on in secret servers for the inner circle must be really fun.

 

[and 127 others]

The attached image contains exhaustive detail surrounding Z/Insurgency Moon's interactions with Randomini. Specifically, it provides concrete dates and locations of all in-person interactions, planned and actual, as well as an integrated point-by-point rebuttal of Z's claim. Randomini has only interacted with two SCP fans in-person.

Any claims about in-person meetings between Randomini and other SCP site users, besides those below, are fabricated.
Any claims about Randomini having inappropriate contact with anyone via the internet or otherwise are fabricated.

Z has access to unedited, datestamped Skype logs to verify the below claims. Site administrative staff have been provided with Skype logs and other evidence and concluded Randomini was not at fault. This outcome will not be publicly logged on 05 Command site, as per site policy on harassment cases; it would also further deanonymise Z. Logs will remain private unless Z elects to release them only partially or in edited fashion, in which case all will be posted from this account.

Randomini had no knowledge of proven claims in this thread while they were occurring, is not currently an active staff member, and has negligible control over the website.

View attachment 1480129

Phew. You guys smell that? Smells like SCP staff up in here all of a sudden.

 

[JonRonsons2015Book]

Phew. You guys smell that? Smells like SCP staff up in here all of a sudden.

Neither Randomini nor this user are current staff members.
Any evidence to the contrary is an out-of-date document.
The above post was made with Randomini's cooperation and permission.

 

[Mexican_Wizard_711]

Neither Randomini nor this user are current staff members.
Any evidence to the contrary is an out-of-date document.
The above post was made with Randomini's cooperation and permission.

I think he is making a joke on how the current SCP staff like to follow this thread and read everything that is posted on here

 

[and 127 others]

I think he is making a joke on how the current SCP staff like to follow this thread and read everything that is posted on here

Classic SCP-style mental deficit.

 

[Lil' Misogynist]

The attached image contains exhaustive detail surrounding Z/Insurgency Moon's interactions with Randomini. Specifically, it provides concrete dates and locations of all in-person interactions, planned and actual, as well as an integrated point-by-point rebuttal of Z's claim. Randomini has only interacted with two SCP fans in-person.

Any claims about in-person meetings between Randomini and other SCP site users, besides those below, are fabricated.
Any claims about Randomini having inappropriate contact with anyone via the internet or otherwise are fabricated.

Z has access to unedited, datestamped Skype logs to verify the below claims. Site administrative staff have been provided with Skype logs and other evidence and concluded Randomini was not at fault. This outcome will not be publicly logged on 05 Command site, as per site policy on harassment cases; it would also further deanonymise Z. Logs will remain private unless Z elects to release them only partially or in edited fashion, in which case all will be posted from this account.

Randomini had no knowledge of proven claims in this thread while they were occurring, is not currently an active staff member, and has negligible control over the website.

View attachment 1480129

You have provided no proof for anything in the attached image, not even censored screenshots of the alleged Skype messages or social media posts. As it stands, it is Randomini's word against Z's word. Here is what we do know: Z was inappropriately targeted by several members of the SCP community while underage. The current captain of the Anti-Harassment Team has lied in public before, something I proved. At the moment, there is no good reason as to why anyone reading this should believe what you have posted over Z's claim, like it or not. Would you like to tell us your Wikidot username, how you acquired this info/why you were asked to post here despite not being staff, and why we should believe what you have stated in your post? If you're going to come here to speak on the behalf of another person, you need screenshots.

 

[JonRonsons2015Book]

At the moment, there is no good reason as to why anyone reading this should believe what you have posted over Z's claim, like it or not.

Randomini makes substantially more grounded claims than Z. If any given sub-claim within it was false, it should be relatively easy for Z to falsify; meanwhile, Z's claim is vague and functionally unfalsifiable. The sequence of events described is mostly compatible with Z's claim rather than directly contradicting it, only doing so relative to Z's percieved intentionality of interaction. As it is far easier to falsify Randomini's claim than Z's in the event of it being inaccurate, it should be considered the stronger evidence.

how you acquired this info/why you were asked to post here despite not being staff

Independent investigation + direct communication with Randomini. Figured disclosure was in the public interest here, Randomini agrees. Randomini will confirm agreement with these posts in response to any Wikidot PM asking about it, but will not provide any further information without Z's permission (see below).

If you're going to come here to speak on the behalf of another person, you need screenshots.

Screenshots of relevant public-facing social media posts make deanonymisation of Z relatively trivial. Censored screenshots of Skype logs would reveal identical textual information as provided above, but it can always be counter-claimed that "we don't know the other user is Z" or that they were wholesale fabricated. In the absence of further clarification or statement from Z, permission from Z to deanonymise her is provided, or both Randomini and Z both confirm the accuracy of publicly posted logs, no further information can be provided without either further compromising Z's identity, or doubt still remaining regarding the accuracy of any given claim.

Randomini is willing to go ahead with full public disclosure of Skype logs, dependent on Z signing off on it here via the Insurgency Moon account. If Z wants, they can even post those logs themselves and Randomini will either confirm their accuracy and completeness or, if Randomini claims they're wholesale fabricated, provide alternative exhaustive logs as already documented by him. If it's the former, there will be nothing to contradict Randomini's claim. If it's the latter and we end up with two exhaustive but contradictory sets of logs - well, one of them must have a lot of time on their hands.

Only after complete and mutually agreed upon public disclosure will either party have evidence for their claims. Until then, as you say, neither person has any proof - but it seems easier for Z to disprove any of Randomini's claims than it is for Randomini to disprove Z's. Until we see those logs, Randomini's remains the stronger claim.

 

[kiwi-identified cow]

Phew. You guys smell that? Smells like SCP staff up in here all of a sudden.

Site administrative staff have been provided with Skype logs and other evidence and concluded Randomini was not at fault. This outcome will not be publicly logged on 05 Command site, as per site policy on harassment cases; it would also further deanonymise Z. Logs will remain private unless Z elects to release them only partially or in edited fashion, in which case all will be posted from this account.

Screenshots of relevant public-facing social media posts make deanonymisation of Z relatively trivial. Censored screenshots of Skype logs would reveal identical textual information as provided above, but it can always be counter-claimed that "we don't know the other user is Z" or that they were wholesale fabricated. In the absence of further clarification or statement from Z, permission from Z to deanonymise her is provided, or both Randomini and Z both confirm the accuracy of publicly posted logs, no further information can be provided without either further compromising Z's identity, or doubt still remaining regarding the accuracy of any given claim.

Yeah, SCP staff talk a certain way like this person does. Super stiff and bureaucratic. This person is also going out of their way to talk in third person regarding site policy and staff actions (bolded above). The manner of speaking leaks into the overall culture too, but staff are the worst offenders for it. It's clear in how they all talk on O5command, but I've attached about 1.5 years' worth of #site17 logs for general reference.

I also recommend searching for key usernames, as well as keywords having to do with mental illness and social justice; these topics appear to be the cruxes of SCP Exceptionalism. The place is a miserable crab bucket of paranoid accusations, fear of your peers, and Hollywood-style performative leftism. And now, instead of admitting to all of their shit and actually trying to be better people, looks like they just spent hours editing together a massive, evidence-less document (chock-full of the same bureaucrap phrasing) to try and discredit one of the youngest grooming victims. Wow

P.S. Sorry to see that my IRCCloud account joined 17 in January 2020, Procy! I have shit cell service and intended to log in but not connect, because I was just on there to download these logs of y'all's insanity

Edit: Nice username.

 

[JonRonsons2015Book]

looks like they just spent hours editing together a massive, evidence-less document (chock-full of the same bureaucrap phrasing)

If only we knew an ex-staff member who has a vested interest in exhaustively and definitively refuting this claim.

You can publicly verify at least one of Randomini's claims: check the activity drop-off from early 2018 at http://www.wikidot.com/user:info/randomini, with only 3 maintenance edits within 2018 after the date he gives as cutting contact, and 11 in 2019, relative to the much more frequent activity before then. Would gladly provide other links but you really can identify Z from them with only marginal sleuthing. If Z signs off here on de-anonymising being acceptable, I'll gladly link to the public-facing social media examples Randomini has as further supporting evidence. They're timestamped at the times claimed so could not have been tampered with after the fact.

Unfortunately, that really is the extent of what can be provided that's both externally verifiable to everyone here and doesn't have a non-negligible risk to further de-anonymise Z.

 

[Lil' Misogynist]

If only we knew an ex-staff member who has a vested interest in exhaustively and definitively refuting this claim.

You can publicly verify at least one of Randomini's claims: check the activity drop-off from early 2018 at http://www.wikidot.com/user:info/randomini, with only 3 maintenance edits within 2018 after the date he gives as cutting contact, and 11 in 2019, relative to the much more frequent activity before then. Would gladly provide other links but you really can identify Z from them with only marginal sleuthing. If Z signs off here on de-anonymising being acceptable, I'll gladly link to the public-facing social media examples Randomini has as further supporting evidence. They're timestamped at the times claimed so could not have been tampered with after the fact.

Unfortunately, that really is the extent of what can be provided that's both externally verifiable to everyone here and doesn't have a non-negligible risk to further de-anonymise Z.

You can post proof or get out of the thread. It’s not that hard. You haven’t “refuted” Z’s claims, you’ve only caused unnecessary confusion by posting here. Don’t come back until you have Skype screenshots. This thread is full of screenshots with names censored for privacy and it hasn’t been an issue until you tried to make it one.

 

[Mexican_Wizard_711]

If only we knew an ex-staff member who has a vested interest in exhaustively and definitively refuting this claim.

You can publicly verify at least one of Randomini's claims: check the activity drop-off from early 2018 at http://www.wikidot.com/user:info/randomini, with only 3 maintenance edits within 2018 after the date he gives as cutting contact, and 11 in 2019, relative to the much more frequent activity before then. Would gladly provide other links but you really can identify Z from them with only marginal sleuthing. If Z signs off here on de-anonymising being acceptable, I'll gladly link to the public-facing social media examples Randomini has as further supporting evidence. They're timestamped at the times claimed so could not have been tampered with after the fact.

Unfortunately, that really is the extent of what can be provided that's both externally verifiable to everyone here and doesn't have a non-negligible risk to further de-anonymise Z.

You only provided one attachment and that's it, @Lil' Misogynist meanwhile has presented several screenshots and a couple of archives that gives a clearer picture on the situation.

Yeah, SCP staff talk a certain way like this person does. Super stiff and bureaucratic. This person is also going out of their way to talk in third person regarding site policy and staff actions (bolded above). The manner of speaking leaks into the overall culture too, but staff are the worst offenders for it. It's clear in how they all talk on O5command, but I've attached about 1.5 years' worth of #site17 logs for general reference.

Don't these guys ever get tired of acting like this? I get that the site is about a Secret Organization that catches weird things. But this Role-Playing and LARPing as government secret agents comes off as corny and goofy, it reminds of the time when Creepypasta was more popular and how multiple kids in the comment section of Slenderman videos would beg for slenderman to take them so they can be his proxies or when fan girls thought Jeff the Killer was cute.

Anyway, this talk of the site's staff and culture makes me think up this video. it's funny how most online communities despite being about different things, all act the same.

 

[ToS]

The attached image contains exhaustive detail surrounding Z/Insurgency Moon's interactions with Randomini. Specifically, it provides concrete dates and locations of all in-person interactions, planned and actual, as well as an integrated point-by-point rebuttal of Z's claim. Randomini has only interacted with two SCP fans in-person.

Any claims about in-person meetings between Randomini and other SCP site users, besides those below, are fabricated.
Any claims about Randomini having inappropriate contact with anyone via the internet or otherwise are fabricated.

Z has access to unedited, datestamped Skype logs to verify the below claims. Site administrative staff have been provided with Skype logs and other evidence and concluded Randomini was not at fault. This outcome will not be publicly logged on 05 Command site, as per site policy on harassment cases; it would also further deanonymise Z. Logs will remain private unless Z elects to release them only partially or in edited fashion, in which case all will be posted from this account.

Randomini had no knowledge of proven claims in this thread while they were occurring, is not currently an active staff member, and has negligible control over the website.

View attachment 1480129

There are certainly two sides to every story. On the one hand, I am readily available to think of Randomini as a misunderstood, conflicted, and hesitant participant in this drama. Fair enough to want to clear his name. But hiding behind a new proxy KF farm account (you just a big fan of his or something?) comes off as being a scared, dishonest wuss. Contrast that to Psyantroos, or Z herself, and other ex SCP who showed some spine by coming here themselves.

I’d rather Randomini be cleared in a way, because after listening to his work on the kaktuskast, specifically his audio production and humor (pronouncing djkwaktus’s name in several variations in a dry speed run through all author page names had me holding my sides), I held Randomini in a very positive light, prior to his involvement here.

Spoiler

But this KF account sits off with me. Comes off as untrustworthy and a trying-too-hard intellectual. No one here is a #MeToo believe all women loon. But there are spots in this would-be total exoneration that are pretty unbelievable to me, and I’m inclined to take Z more at her word. Why?

Any claims about Randomini having inappropriate contact with anyone via the internet or otherwise are fabricated.

lol what? This isnt kids making rules up on a playground here, doesn’t work like that. Are we supposed to just say “Oh! oh okay.” to this? As others have said, this isn’t proof or even evidence. It’s a nice timeline. Skype logs won’t prove all the claims here, like Randomini was frustrated that Z bought tickets to an event that she only got to see half of, apparently pissed off that she was going for him and not for the event. That’s a crazy reason to get mad at someone, comes off as fake as hell, and good for Randomini’s psychological profile, it’s probably false. That’s like how Eric Cartmen would cast his own actions in his side of a story.

The original post sanitizes Randomini in full. There is zero give regarding any wrongdoing, ulterior or parallel motives, any alternative intentionality aside from angelic and extraordinarily circumspect behavior. “Sure we can hang out together again and again and I know you revere me highly and maybe I have an idea of how you have interacted with other SCP authors but nooooo don’t hug me nooooo, love my interests and not meeeee” Uh huh. Recall the rule SCP had to put up to its elite; don’t leverage your reputation. A novel lesson to this bunch.

Randomini being totally oblivious to the manner in which other staff had been interacting with Z (Eskobar, Jade) in a community that is chatty with gossip to the core, I find hard to believe, assuming the dates work. If he knew about it, why put himself out there? To be a “true friend” or play the rescuer role? Uh huh. We know he was/is in a circle of some really repellant individuals, on a site that is saturated in a sex and hook-up culture. He enjoyed the clout of the inner circle and now he doesn’t enjoy the connotations, but that’s the price.

Also, yes this account is steaming with SCP autism. Like Psy said, the tone has the sort of pseudo-bureaucratic importance and LARPing that exists in the 05 threads (“per the Almighty policy”), the table formatting is pretty odd except in the context of familiarity with Wikidot code, it’s delivered with the same kind of pomp. Feels like an adolescent trying to play lawyer. The author of it asserts things only Randomini could possibly know (“Randomini has only interacted with two SCP fans in-person,” “Randomini had no knowledge of proven claims in this thread while they were occurring”); so if we take it seriously, we can only ultimately believe that it’s either Randomini himself or this person is discrediting themselves in their over-reaching to clear his name.

The account was made 12 hrs prior to the first post. Definitely an obtuse, very motivated interjection imo. Sticks out like a sore thumb.

“Exhaustive detail”? Informative yeah but it’s no more exhaustive than typing “refuted” or “refuted totally” is convincing. It’s very leftist-esque. Like the hilarious “detracting!” rhetorical stamp that’s thrown on an opponent’s successful counter-arguments that leftists just want to handwave. “Point by point rebuttal”? Don’t talk something up that it isn’t. Bad salesmanship and it works against anyone taking you seriously.

Would have been a better strategy to lean into the softer claims and let the independent minds here pick up any slack. Until any grippable evidence is presented, you have thrown your believability out the window in just a few posts.

 

[Lil' Misogynist]

There are certainly two sides to every story. On the one hand, I am readily available to think of Randomini as a misunderstood, conflicted, and hesitant participant in this drama. Fair enough to want to clear his name. But hiding behind a new proxy KF farm account (you just a big fan of his or something?) comes off as being a scared, dishonest wuss. Contrast that to Psyantroos, or Z herself, and other ex SCP who showed some spine by coming here themselves.

I’d rather Randomini be cleared in a way, because after listening to his work on the kaktuskast, specifically his audio production and humor (pronouncing djkwaktus’s name in several variations in a dry speed run through all author page names had me holding my sides), I held Randomini in a very positive light, prior to his involvement here.

Spoiler

But this KF account sits off with me. Comes off as untrustworthy and a trying-too-hard intellectual. No one here is a #MeToo believe all women loon. But there are spots in this would-be total exoneration that are pretty unbelievable to me, and I’m inclined to take Z more at her word. Why?


lol what? This isnt kids making rules up on a playground here, doesn’t work like that. Are we supposed to just say “Oh! oh okay.” to this? As others have said, this isn’t proof or even evidence. It’s a nice timeline. Skype logs won’t prove all the claims here, like Randomini was frustrated that Z bought tickets to an event that she only got to see half of, apparently pissed off that she was going for him and not for the event. That’s a crazy reason to get mad at someone, comes off as fake as hell, and good for Randomini’s psychological profile, it’s probably false. That’s like how Eric Cartmen would cast his own actions in his side of a story.

The original post sanitizes Randomini in full. There is zero give regarding any wrongdoing, ulterior or parallel motives, any alternative intentionality aside from angelic and extraordinarily circumspect behavior. “Sure we can hang out together again and again and I know you revere me highly and maybe I have an idea of how you have interacted with other SCP authors but nooooo don’t hug me nooooo, love my interests and not meeeee” Uh huh. Recall the rule SCP had to put up to its elite; don’t leverage your reputation. A novel lesson to this bunch.

Randomini being totally oblivious to the manner in which other staff had been interacting with Z (Eskobar, Jade) in a community that is chatty with gossip to the core, I find hard to believe, assuming the dates work. If he knew about it, why put himself out there? To be a “true friend” or play the rescuer role? Uh huh. We know he was/is in a circle of some really repellant individuals, on a site that is saturated in a sex and hook-up culture. He enjoyed the clout of the inner circle and now he doesn’t enjoy the connotations, but that’s the price.

Also, yes this account is steaming with SCP autism. Like Psy said, the tone has the sort of pseudo-bureaucratic importance and LARPing that exists in the 05 threads (“per the Almighty policy”), the table formatting is pretty odd except in the context of familiarity with Wikidot code, it’s delivered with the same kind of pomp. Feels like an adolescent trying to play lawyer. The author of it asserts things only Randomini could possibly know (“Randomini has only interacted with two SCP fans in-person,” “Randomini had no knowledge of proven claims in this thread while they were occurring”); so if we take it seriously, we can only ultimately believe that it’s either Randomini himself or this person is discrediting themselves in their over-reaching to clear his name.

The account was made 12 hrs prior to the first post. Definitely an obtuse, very motivated interjection imo. Sticks out like a sore thumb.

“Exhaustive detail”? Informative yeah but it’s no more exhaustive than typing “refuted” or “refuted totally” is convincing. It’s very leftist-esque. Like the hilarious “detracting!” rhetorical stamp that’s thrown on an opponent’s successful counter-arguments that leftists just want to handwave. “Point by point rebuttal”? Don’t talk something up that it isn’t. Bad salesmanship and it works against anyone taking you seriously.

Would have been a better strategy to lean into the softer claims and let the independent minds here pick up any slack. Until any grippable evidence is presented, you have thrown your believability out the window in just a few posts.

This is a really good analyis, but I also want to point out something that I didn't really comprehend last night, which is that this post employs two strategies that abusers use. The first is that the poster claims that Z was "touch starved" and repeatedly made physical contact that made Randomini uncomfortable. This detail is actually a huge red flag for me. Abusers will very often lie that their victims were actually the ones who were creepy/abusive/manipulative/etc. to create confusion and hostility towards the victim. Despite the seriousness of this accusation, it ultimately depicts Z as a deeply troubled individual, a move made to make readers doubt her mental state while painting Randomini as a responsible adult, something that the poster repeatedly emphasizes. It strikes me as manipulative. Another problem in my eyes is the way this poster claims to not be willing to present screenshot evidence unless Z herself shows up to give permission. While this is presented as a charitable action to protect her anonymity, I think it's actually an attempt to intimidate her. For example, this seems eerily similar to the way that abusive people will sometimes use the court system in a malicious way to gain control over their victims. It's incredibly suspicious. I think you're right, I think this post was made by Randomini himself.

It's clear in how they all talk on O5command, but I've attached about 1.5 years' worth of #site17 logs for general reference.

Also, not to sidetrack, but you all should take a look at this attachment if you have time. It's literally a huge text file with 1.5 years worth of logs from Site17, the public staff channel.

 

[kiwi-identified cow]

It's incredibly suspicious. I think you're right, I think this post was made by Randomini himself.

Yeah, it seems like @JonRonsons2015Book was either Randomini trying to sound like a staff member or staff trying to focus attention on Randomini since he's (allegedly) not in a position of power with them anymore. Staff were already fine with eventually acknowledging controversy in order to save their public image, like when they banned Gabriel Jade and Eskobar only after the proof was public. It wouldn't surprise me if their newest tactic will be to show up in unofficial locations to give Official Statements defending their own, since more people are starting to see through the old tactics. It's wild, there are so many simpler ends to this situation, none of which involve continuing to cover up the truth like this. (Also, semi-related, I'm attaching a couple of Bright's pics that I'd been meaning to edit for a while.)

 

[TheRatcatcher]

There needs to be a Garth Ennis styled revenge story where the GOC wages war against the Foundation and finally kills the pedophile Dr. Bright and all the annoying self-insert doctors.

 

[Mexican_Wizard_711]

There needs to be a Garth Ennis styled revenge story where the GOC wages war against the Foundation and finally kills the pedophile Dr. Bright and all the annoying self-insert doctors.

And also destroy all the shitty SCPs that clogged up the site and launch a nuclear warhead at the tranny satellite.

 

[DungeonMaster]

And also destroy all the shitty SCPs that clogged up the site and launch a nuclear warhead at the tranny satellite.

This calls for SCP 3922.

It's only until it became popular on youtube to the point where there's a readthrough everyplace you see that the average joe is not going to consider how rotten and corrupt this place is. They're going to so blinded by what the current administration takes credit for. SCP has a great reputation online. There's so much fan content of outstanding quality. There are orbiter fandoms who are totally unaware of this. It's on the level of a multimedia franchise, and a community driven one, at that. There's just something so beautiful about it, having something so massive and creative twelve years in the making, made by the crowd, yet something that good can't have a horrible catch to it. Hopefully with some luck and pluck, we can bring them down to Yandev's level. Let them see the truth. Contrast the beauty, so they will hate the ugliness that clings to it.

If I saw the fan animations, the games, the sheer amount of hype SCP has today as a younger teen, I would have shed tears of joy.

It's like China's Cultural Revolution. An incredible culture, laid low by vile usurpers. Its treasures decimated, and its values warped by a performative ideology by an administration that only cares about power and nepotism. And yet it has the gall to take credit for everything that was made before it. And as usual, it conflates the community with the administration. If you don't believe in what the government says wholeheartedly, you are not chinese. And at the same time, they believe that China began with the communist government. The same goes for the SCP wiki. If you don't fall in line with the mods, you're not a true member of the community. Any government without two legs to stand on will conflate state with nation. As far as they're concerned, SCPwiki began with the current SJW infestation.

 

[Lil' Misogynist]

This calls for SCP 3922.

It's only until it became popular on youtube to the point where there's a readthrough everyplace you see that the average joe is not going to consider how rotten and corrupt this place is. They're going to so blinded by what the current administration takes credit for. SCP has a great reputation online. There's so much fan content of outstanding quality. There are orbiter fandoms who are totally unaware of this. It's on the level of a multimedia franchise, and a community driven one, at that. There's just something so beautiful about it, having something so massive and creative twelve years in the making, made by the crowd, yet something that good can't have a horrible catch to it. Hopefully with some luck and pluck, we can bring them down to Yandev's level. Let them see the truth. Contrast the beauty, so they will hate the ugliness that clings to it.

If I saw the fan animations, the games, the sheer amount of hype SCP has today as a younger teen, I would have shed tears of joy.

It's like China's Cultural Revolution. An incredible culture, laid low by vile usurpers. Its treasures decimated, and its values warped by a performative ideology by an administration that only cares about power and nepotism. And yet it has the gall to take credit for everything that was made before it. And as usual, it conflates the community with the administration. If you don't believe in what the government says wholeheartedly, you are not chinese. And at the same time, they believe that China began with the communist government. The same goes for the SCP wiki. If you don't fall in line with the mods, you're not a true member of the community. Any government without two legs to stand on will conflate state with nation. As far as they're concerned, SCPwiki began with the current SJW infestation.

You do have a point. This is basically what the Internet Outreach team specifically does, and the only time I've really seen it be discussed was in Bondsmagii's controversial cult post. The SCP Wiki (and its international branches too) have a very large social media presence. IO has formal accounts and groups on a ton of different websites and where they can't fill in the gaps, there are people to represent them. I used to regularly talk to the people who run the major SCP Amino group and a bunch of different Youtubers, and as far as I know, everyone who starts to gain any sort of influence within the outer community gets invited to the private Internet Outreach Discord server. It's why back when the Andrey Duksin lawsuit started, every SCP Youtuber was (rightfully) talking about it with approval and guidance from one of the moderators, but the only person to cover any sort of drama since then has been Dr. Cimmerian, who doesn't really have a good relationship with the staff team as a whole. Hell, even some Subreddits with no relationship to the SCP community had the "Stand with SCP-RU" logo and were encouraging their members to donate. It's near-impossible to publicly talk about the SCP community in any way that isn't positive because you'll look like a troll. All the influencers are spoon-fed information. I guarantee you that any large drama Youtuber who finds out about any of this will inevitably get an email from someone who "just wants to talk."

 

[ToS]

No clearer admission since the pride month fiasco that SCP staff is the inner clique of a political cult that has to think a homogeneous way regarding the primary leadership's identities. No alternate opinions allowed in official positions, even though that's not strictly in the rules of the site (guess it is now) but they'll claim at the same time that they support freedom of speech and thought and believe that they are "inclusive":

If you are on staff and have a different political position, you better be quiet about it if you want promotions. Feefees trump rights and original thought here in the name of social justice.

Discussion Thread - Retirement, Inactive, Returning Staff - O5 Command

05command.wikidot.com

[archive]

 

[Lil' Misogynist]

This caption gets me every time