The Soon to Be Deleted Bright List
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 мар 2023
- If you want to make your voice heard, you can vote here: scp-wiki.wikidot.com/forum/t-...
Support me via Patreon here: / dcimmerian
Check out the community discord here: / discord
Check me out on the tweeters: / dcimmerian
This work is licensed creative commons 4.0 attribution/share alike.
All SCP wiki works are licensed creative commons 3.0 attribution/share alike.
The image of Doctor Cimmerian was created by Perelka_L.
Channel art was created by TheVolgun 
Развлечения
My opinion would be to just make it a vague list of shinanigans researchers across the foundation have done.
Sort of a "You're the reason we have labels on everything" type of thing.
That does sound like a good compromise to the whole conundrum. When there is a will there is a pen, or um keyboard?
Hmm yeah what if it just "they who shall not be named"
Kinda like the bottleneck canon
The idea of it being several is quite funny to me. Just some random dude named Gary decided to cause anarchy one day.
Making it just one guy feels like it's being too hard to be the 'iM sO qUiRkY' stereotype.
Gardi stop pinging me PLEASE
Damn, this seems almost unanimous. I was partial to the 'replace with a new character' idea, but I get it.
it would honestly take too long
Yeah sadly, respecting the memory of the creator would be disrespecting the victim...
And honestly the list is not that important compared to actual people who were hurt
@@comicstrider4851 no one was hurt lol
I don't think the Bright List should be taken down, I think the name should just be changed. That way his goofiness remains with the character even if his name is different now.
@Jasi Duy Nguyễn than we should delete Scp-173 next. IT’s also a bad article for modern standards.
If we delete every article that’s considered “bad” than we are vote up to next year. Just live with it that there are good and bad articles, but there are all Scp history.
@@dasscplexikon9482 "bu-bu-but the peanut" or some shit like that
@@dasscplexikon9482 173 never hurt anyone. If it had, we'd probably be having this discussion about that, too.
@@Brickerbrack the list is not hurting anyone, the name of bright is the problem. It would be the easiest decision to just name Dr Bright to Dr Shaw (or another) and preserve all of his lore and character traits. It should be dr bright with another name.
It appears that there may have been some confusion regarding the ongoing vote. While the primary vote concerns the deletion of the list, there is a secondary vote on what to do with it afterwards. Three options have been presented.
The first option, "No action beyond deletion," has received the lowest number of votes. This would result in the list simply being deleted with no further action taken.
The second option, "Replace the page with some sort of warning or message," would mean that the list still exists but is no longer hosted on the website. Instead, a message would be displayed, potentially with links to additional resources.
The third option, "Replace the page with a new list featuring a new character," which in my opinion is my favorite. This would involve the creation of a new list, featuring a different character and presented in a different format. This option may also include a warning or message.
If either the second or third option is chosen, a follow-up discussion will be held to determine the next steps. Overall, it seems that the third and second options are the most voted for, with the first option the least voted option.
That’s good to hear and thanks for the clarification cuz this video didn’t have enough info on them tbh
Will the admin concede this?
eeehh I don't really like that because although there are other crazy doctors at the foundation bright in a sense is the most boastful about his shit because the foundation cant kill him and as such has free rain to do the most dumbest shit.
Again although there are other similar to bright if anyone else other then a small handful of people tried anything bright did they will be terminated or fired from the foundation in a heart beat. plus no one has actual reason in terms of bright just doing something because it was stupid because bright actually has a dark back story of life just fucking him over and he slowly goes insane after not being able to save his family from a dark fait so the last thing he can do is well be a nut case and laugh long enough to block out his pain. Again he can do this because A the foundation cant kill him because his now a anomaly which is another reason why they cant also get rid of him, On top of the fact his still very competent when his actually doing his job.
To have a list of new character would have to mean that most of them get killed off or disappear with in the first appearance. Because the foundation would not have any reason to have unlike bright such recluses researches. meaning all the creativity goes to waste cause they all just get one entry only.
I kind of want a combination of the first and second options.
Outright delete the list, and replace it with a serious warning of who Dr. Bright is, and if there are any signs of his existence, or people alike that of him.
For the third option, I feel like it probably should be a -J at best.
@@thealientree3821 I think it was a -J to begin with.
Having looked at the votes, most people seem to prefer it being deleted. But for some reason, there's a large number of people who don't want to have a new list with a new character put up in place of it.
If the majority of people want to take it down, it makes sense that they don't want to just rebrand it. It would be extra-goofy at the least and pathetic at most
@@apollyon2018 very much so, which is why I figured it won't be just a simple name swap. The option even suggests that.
We want it gone, because most of it was written by Bright himself, which in hindsight really should have been a clear sign of the monster he is. Replacing it with a different character won't work, because the presence of Bright would still be there. It's best if it's simply scrubbed from the site altogether. Besides, the list wasn't *_that_* funny.
as Comic Strider said, "respecting the memory of the creator would be disrespecting the victim". Someone proposed a general shenanigan list as a sort of, "you're the reason why shampoo has instructions" type of thing, and I personally agree with that.
@@masquerading18 were not respecting the memory of the writer
Most people Didint know Dr bright was a real person
The foundation should be separated for Irl affairs we are talking about a foundation that litterally holds godly beings It be more realistic if the entire thing would just be redacted and covered up in the lore
Just voted. I do get why ppl want it gone. My ideal case would be to have a link with a warning that explains who Bright is before the actual page, instead of outright deletion, but I get why many are still uncomfortable with it being up int he first place.
I'm gonna be honest I never knew Dr. Bright was a real person, I thought they were just a meme. Going forward can we just assume all references to them are to the fictional character, not the real one?
The author goes by another name, but since most only know him as (Admin)Bright, most only see Dr. Bright as the author.
@@withedoter6277 so what did he do that made all this weak ass drama?
@@grilledleeks6514 Grooming and some other pedo shit me think, I never am close to the SCP fandom🤷🏻♂️
You know its not good when you have to delete the bright list multiple times
It didn't "have to" be deleted at all. A rogue ex-mod deleted it in violation of the rules right before officially retiring, and the re-upload didn't retain any of the up-votes.
Holy shit no fun allowed
We've moved past lolFoundation, get on with the times.
Well rip to long established scp history and a good chunk of the lore and canons.
Sadly, they're not taking down/rewriting 963😔. If they want to remove AdminBright's influence from the wiki, they also need to deal with 963
Yeah, deletion is something of a half measure without also addressing the "root of Dr. Bright" that is SCP-963. Personally, I think it will eventually (years from now) be rewritten, which seems to happen with the more controversial triple digit SCP articles.
Kaktus is making his own rewrite of 963, so there is that. Also you can always just down vote 963 if you don't like it, every vote counts.
@@couldntbebotheredwithaname you could also try getting over it.
@@grilledleeks6514 Okay? Are you trying to make a point about something or are you just saying things?
In my opinion, they shouldn't take down or rewrite 963, at least not based on what the author has done IRL. I don't care about the Bright List, because it wasn't 'canon' anyway, but 963 is referenced in a lot of works and has a huge presence on the site.
Idk the details of this situation cuz I’ve been busy irl and I have been a bit disconnected from the community for a bit due to irl shit but I’ve always enjoyed the stories, lore, and etc.
I haven’t watched many videos here in awhile but I saw this so I had to check it out, so idk the whole situation and what the author did but it sucks that it will be deleted and not just remade.
I get it somewhat, it’s a bad situation and a lot of emotions, bad guy made it so some bad memories or feelings, or maybe they want to distance themselves from it cuz if they keep his work it will look like they support him which scared people away or other valid reasons I suppose but I don’t get why it can’t be remade or archived or something just seems like emotions getting in the way tbh
It’s a part of the lore of the universe they all made together it is the history of the world that was made and to remove it due to irl shit is just so dirty and lazy to do tbh idc about the feelings of others on the person they are fine to feel they way yet why get rid of a funny list that many enjoyed cuz of the character and the content, I didn’t even know the person behind the creation and idc, I am an adult I can separate the art from the artist it’s just a logical thing to do, it’s very illogical and emotionally driven to just stop enjoying something cuz the person who made it was bad tbh
But I guess humans are flawed creatures who are ruled by emotions more than logic so idk why I’m surprised.
Reason and rationality have long since fled from us.
I love SCP, been a part of the community since... I think 2016? Jeez it's been a long time. Anyway, I don't keep up with the actual site and community much so I appreciate these videos on what's happening a lot!
I know that the real bright hurt a lot of people but I love the character bright to much to see him go. I follow separate the art from the artist kind of deal but I do think that anyone that interacts with the character needs to know what the real bright did so that the horror is not forgotten. but that being said getting rid of the list will still kinda be a a bitter experience for me.
I also here a lot of people say change him with another and I don't like that to. The reason is I don't just like bright because of the funny side of him I like his back story of going insane after all his family dies or suffers as anomaly's and his powerless to do anything so he hides his pain by doing the most stupid shit. replacing does not just mean getting rid of the name, it means killing the character as a whole. and I prefer a character that does stupid shit because he has had the worst card game of life and knows the foundation cant kill him rather then a character that does his shit for no reason. it will be more of a shallow replacement then a name change
I agree
Cimmerian uploaded today, today was a good day
Fᥲᥞᥞᥝt
I find the list silly and not representative of the more "serious" articles of today, so I'm glad to see it go from that point of view :D
Might as well scrap the entire wiki and start over at this rate
Yep
what would be better is if we made a new list of things foundation personnel are not allowed to do.
Note to people wondering:
The list got nuked, wiped, kersplooted
I’m slightly annoyed now that the main Bright article is featured in a wonderful SCP art book I bought last year. Wish I could somehow edit it to all say Shaw lol.
Well scp -5500 is gonna be a lot more confusing without it.
Well, as of March 23rd, the Bright List has been deleted from the wiki. I have a PDF copy that I made yesterday, if anyone is interested.
I suggest you guys begin making back-ups for all the Bright related content rn. Do it before this witch hunt goes out of hand.
Thanks for giving me a heads up so I could save it
My god the amount of book burning that would happen if using this standard, FFS people
The character is literally a self insert
If his list stays up, people will continue to just think he's a goofy guy who hasn't groomed someone
But hay, think whatever you want to
But the in-universe Dr. Bright didn't groom anyone. So the whole fuzz is a bit exaggarated.
Why delete everything that's linked to that character now? Like someone wrote, just archive it somewhere, move it from the main-categories to somewhere else, where it won't be found so easily. Seems like the more reasonable option.
@@thykingythingy9967 And the reason you can't replace that character with a completely new one is because?
"book burning" lmao
at least understand the words you want to invoke before you borrow them for arguments
@@Jan91651 That solves nothing. The history and infamy of the article would still be there. It's barely a bandaid solution
This man deserves more respect.
just need a new list of what not to do at the foundation with new funnier things on it.
No showing scp 999 or any other safe class scp's nsfw content
Can we keep the chainsaw canons?
Probably not
You do realize this is like giving Is dead shot a loaded gun But anyways I guess the gloves are off
O5 has been apprised of the situation.
Guess R.R. Martin was wrong. People can vote how it ends
I don’t see why we don’t just rename it to Shaw … why delete a part of scp history.
Renaming/rewriting it would be insufficient for many. It would be like putting a bandaid on a major wound. For some, calling this article site history is like calling confederate statues "historical".
@A bush from the Island of Borneo I mean they are? Sure we should remove conferderacy statues but not remove conferderates from history books
@@wingedfish1175 The Wiki isn't a historical documentation site, it's a place to write and publish stories. And as such a site, it's hard to garner more writers or readers if it's known for protecting the works of filth like Adminbright. If you read the votes on the forum, the 2nd option for deletion seems to be the general favorite. So information on what happened will still be there, but the article itself will be gone
It’s a part of the lore of the universe they all made together it is the history of the world that was made and to remove it due to irl shit is just so dirty and lazy to do tbh idc about the feelings of others on the person they are fine to feel they way yet why get rid of a funny list that many enjoyed cuz of the character and the content, I didn’t even know the person behind the creation and idc, I am an adult I can separate the art from the artist it’s just a logical thing to do, it’s very illogical and emotionally driven to just stop enjoying something cuz the person who made it was bad tbh
oop, wrong comment, sorry about that
...Why are we deleting things in the digital age? Whats the point?
Getting a creepy sex pest's stuff off the site is the point.
Because that's what the deletion threshold on the wiki is for...?
Because the Wiki is better without it
@@llewelynshingler2173 Is it? I get why it's gone, i never even cared for the list or the character, but it's removal changes literally nothing
@@KnightspaceORG Firstly, removing it diminishes Writer Bright's fame, Second, it dials back on the LOLfoundation nonsense
I believe it's should not. It is a funny list that can always be made fun of.
Might as well delete every mention of him from SCP article so many SCP’s mention bright just a tiny bit. Maybe not all of em but some really good ones. So frankly I can’t understand why they just can’t change the name. It isn’t so hard trauma or not if someone is called Dr Bobba Boi Chainsaw Launcher Explosive Man I wouldn’t think oh yeah that’s Dr bright. This Site is fucking stupid and I’m disappointed their just burning books then rather actually fix the fucking issue. They think burning their problems away will fix it. Cause it won’t it just won’t. But whatever.
It's hard to explain trauma to a person without it. Small things can set it off depending on the person. To where even mentions can leave either a bitter taste in someone's mouth to extreme uncomfort to reliving the whole situation. Im sure that they won't be deleting other articles having to do with bright. But since the list is literally just bright doing bright things. Renaming it won't do
You do know Elias Shaw exists, right? People are already taking the choice to scrub Bright from the wiki on their own, it's not something being forced upon people.
And I agree that this thing has been blown out of proportion! I don't think the List should get special treatment, it should be deleted the same way every article is, with -10 rating. They're giving the list to much special treatment when it's just another article and should be deleted as such. Also, deleting articles isn't new lmao, it happens all the time on the wiki, that's why the rating module exists, the only difference is that it's actually harder to delete the Bright list then the rest of the wiki, having all these threshold requirements for it to be properly deleted.
@@couldntbebotheredwithaname The reason the list gets special treatment is because its.. Popular. Good? No. Popular? Yes
This is basically SCP 2747 irl
I’m honestly kinda sad that Bright the character is just going to be deleted just like that. I really enjoyed him, but I understand the reasoning
I just kinda wished we rebranded him. Just as the same character with a different name, I feel the Art should be separated from the Creator but it’s too late at this point
It isn’t the Bright character that are going to be deleted, just the bright list.
Dr. Cimmerian on his way to wait until the very last second to vote
why whatever do you mean
Yeah I don’t get this one too
My opinion should be all the Bright family should be removed, it doesn't matter if you remove Jack Bright as long as there still are TJ Bright, Adam Bright, the O5-6 Cowboy who is Jack Bright brother as well and their sister that was dead and reanimated, so it's still a Bright family unless this will be delete as well
do you feel the SCP is bleeding fans? have not heard much of it lately
I know I'm late to this discussion, but I have one question. Why the list specifically? What about other articles and tales that were written by or involved Dr. Bright? Just to be clear, I'm not arguing for it's reinstatement, I'm curious why this one is the one that got all the downvotes?
Personally I’m okay if it’s deleted and something fresh and new can replace it. My opinion is any scp character or content content should be it’s own material and not liked to a specific creator or creators.
I'm far out of the loop here. Why is the list up for deletion? (Edited typo)
Same question here, what happened?!
The ex-author AdminBright (the name giver to Dr. Bright) was banned do to sexual harassment. Now a lot of the community is going crazy and try to delete or change everything that is related to the name “Bright”. I think that dumb because the community created Dr. Bright to the character that we know today. So I’m disappointed to a lot of the members of the English-community
@@dasscplexikon9482 I'm disappointed as well, that's so dumb, by that logic, Genshin Impact should erase many characters only bc the VA is an asshole
Given how important a principle the community treats archiving Foundation history, I gotta say, I'm disappointed with some of you guys. Are we just, like, not going to separate art from the artist here? Bright (the character) wasn't even really the creator's to begin with. He was a name with a vague description, and the community went with his concept and ran. The community did at least 90 to 95% of the work for the character, not the creator. So this wide scale attempt to erase his existence to erase the collective work of the community feels so very, very wrong to me.
It reminds me of how the devils in Chainsaw Man work. The stronger a fear is, the more powerful the devil representing it is. You have all given the creator that power you are trying to rid him of. By removing all this stuff, you are insisting that it's HIS work and giving him that influence over the site. It is my belief that his influence should have just died the moment he was kicked from the site. He leaves with a tarnished name, and that's it. He doesn't get to bring his stuff with him, because it doesn't belong to him anymore, nor was it his to begin with. But deleting this? It's like sending him a delivery saying, "Oh and you can take this back." Give. Him. NOTHING.
But ultimately, what do I know? I'm just one person with my one opinion. If the community goes against it's principles of archiving it's past and votes on the article's removal, that's fine. But I think this insistence within these last few years to spare people's feelings over creative freedom is frankly imprisoning and goes against the ideas of the site.
I wouldn't really say it's sparing people's feelings, as it's more stopping authorBright from being able to prey on other people using the dr. Bright list and/or 963 like they did with the previous victims
@@emissaryfromhell951 Okay, but how would he even do that current day now? He's been banned. It's not possible. Therefore I don't see a problem here.
@@bonafidebruhmoment5440 they used other sites (and still do which is why it's a problem)
Agreed
@@emissaryfromhell951 then the problem is the person, not the fictional stories
This is honestly Orwellian
“This is honestly Orwellian” screams the man who has never read anything written by George Orwell.
Think of the wiki as a library of sorts. If there’s some that the readers don’t enjoy, then they have the right to curate their inventory to better appeal to their readers
@@Bush_Dude I have read Orwell, actually, and I know how the wiki is supposed to work. I also know that the Bright List was not deleted based on the actual rules of the wiki. A rogue ex-mod deleted it in violation of the rules right before officially retiring, and the re-upload didn't retain any of the up-votes.
@@Bush_Dude actually considering orwell was a sex pest it actually is kind of orwellian. lolllll
@@kingvelardDamn, good one!
Wait how is this STILL ongoing?
The staff doesn't want to make a hasty decision on something rather important. They wanted to hear from the community and staff what should or shouldn't be done, then how the voting would work, and then the actual voting process.
@@Bush_Dude okay that's a really good series of reasons and I rescind any criticism.
Oh
How tf did the scp community get this. this real question I'm confused on what's happening n why
The guy who wrote the Dr. Bright list article was recently discovered to be a pedophile and the community has been debating what to do with the article (delete it or not) because people are sensitive. That’s the short of it.
@@zab931 Calling people sensitive for being disgusted at a pedophile and letting them make their own choices on what to do with the article?
RUclips comment moment.
What happened with Bright?
a lot of stuff, primarily grooming
author did what we in the biz call a crime
Fᥲᥞᥞotry
So? What the hell does that have to do with the list?
@@gups4963 Because people will associate the character (who is an author avatar) with the author by name. Trauma's a bitch.
Now do dr strew is not allowed list.
guess that whole "separate the art from the artist" thing is kinda dead
Stop associating real people from fictional characters, even when it's a self-insert. I didn't even consider associating the people behind fictional characters. Literally the same situation as Twitter targetting "LoliVtubers" instead of actual pedos. Puts much more concern about Fictional Characters instead of the real person/people.
the association is there because he didn't just make a self-insert and then separately go do bad things, he used that character and the clout attached to it to actually hurt children. the "separate the art and the artist" line doesn't work when the two are that closely intertwined. you would have a point if you were actually talking about the situation at hand and not sone scenario you invented.
I guess I'm morally grey because I don't dedicate my entire life to doxxing pedos 24/7 and discussed the Dr bright drama for 5 minutes on the Internet.
I thought this was done and dusted, oh well
Art =/= author
Never gotten to do this before. First!
Pleas don't defeated it
MDBGA
Why is it up for deletion?
Why not move it into a category like the SCP-Js?
That's not how -J articles work. The list already has a bolded note at the top that says it's a joke article. It's not being removed because it's an unfunny article that pretends it's funny, it's being removed because AdminBright harassed and did other naughty things to other wiki members.
@@Bush_Dude I wasn't saying to make it a -J, just to give it a non-canon category
I personally found the list to be kind of funny in the sense of "what could have possibly happened to make this a rule?" The speculation was the entertaining part to me. Kind of like those signs on bus windows saying not to enter the bus through the window. But when you consider that "Dr. Bright" isn't really mentioned anywhere else in the canon, it doesn't really make a whole heap of sense
As for the other part of your comment... yikes... Yeah, take it down
Is this seriously still going on?
Thank god.
Voted, deletion with a page saying it was deleted. The original wont be lost, and if you want, internet archive is a wonderful place. Hope most authors swap bright with shaw with no fuss, its exhausting having to hear people argue over what should be a decently open and shut case
People that want to add a 'Dr Bright' to their videos, are they just adding him with a different name? It's still the same character but different names so that the victims don't associate the character with that horrible person. I really love the character alot and was working on another account with SCP videos but I don't want to offend anyone by adding him to the videos. What is the name most people give to the character now?
Separate the art from the artist, istg other fandoms have gotten over this horrible problem faster
Sigh screw the wiki
genuinely like its embarrassing that its taken this long to get this garbage nuked
@@kingvelard ah yes. Let's rag on the wiki for doing a democratic process that allows people to voice their opinion. Change takes time when done properly. When its not people make mistakes which have a worse impact
I mean, why else is the United States egged on by everyone else?
It is a democratic country that goes nowhere.
I think a lot of people are forgetting that the SCP community is not just a creative writing site, but also a community. A place for people to come together and do the things they enjoy. And if some part of the wiki make readers uncomfortable to read and writers uncomfortable to write, you cut it out. I'm all for conserving art, but not at all cost, and if it makes the wiki a better place I say delete it.
Honestly, I was up for converting the Bright List into the Bright Warning. No funny jokes, no bullet points on what he's not allowed to do, just a full wipe of the page and re-issuing as a full essay on how much of a shit human being he is and what he did. That way new people coming to the site would get the rundown on why Bright's a piece of shit and why he is NEVER allowed back onto the wiki. Unfortunately, without a formal warning, I'm worried this gives him a chance to come back under a new name. I dunno how the security on the site works yet, so unless he's only allowed one email per account or whatever, this just means he can make a new self-insert and start over.
I feel like giving people warning signs on what to look out for and what he did (granted, names DO NOT have to be given in regards to victims, that'd be really fucked up to out people like that) would be best to ensure a Bright 2.0 doesn't happen in the future. That, or fully delete the page and issue a warning elsewhere. I dunno, I just feel like having 0 mention on him lets him disappear only to show up with a new persona in the future, just to start some new shit again.
I might be paranoid, but I really, REALLY, *REALLY* don't want to see him come back under a new name to slip in and hurt innocent people again. The Wiki is where we can be creative and make some really interesting creatures, characters, places, artifacts, stories, etc. I don't want to see a Bright List Part 2: Electric Boogaloo, especially when I haven't had the chance to join the wiki in full, and more importantly when there are plenty of victims who NEVER want to see him come back.
I dunno man, I just hope there will be a formal warning about him somewhere on the site. If the list has to go and a new article is written somewhere for everyone to see, then that's fine. I just don't want to see a repeat of this...
It should be deleted and no more self insert characters to avoid this happening again
Then we should delete ALL self insert characters.
@@jexmarro9 Hell, delete the whole wiki while we're at it. Outlawing fiction writing on the internet should be next, just to be safe.
@@HomoChomsky the point I was making went right over your head
DELETE THE LIST AND THE WORLD WILL BE PERFECT!
Am I the only person who wants the article deleted because the article is bad and Dr. Bright is a stupid character outside of all the controversy?
Who cares if it's "stupid"? Bright it's an enjoyable fictional character, he's charismatic, and that wins many people over the even more subjective "it's stupid"