Comments for page "SCP-1094" http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094 Posts in the discussion thread "SCP-1094" Tue, 10 Dec 2019 19:50:23 +0000 http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-4419798 Staff Post - Open http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-4419798 Sun, 10 Nov 2019 17:15:39 +0000 Elogee FishTruck 4037075 The image that was used in this article is non-compliant with the SCP wiki's license (CC BY-SA 3.0) as no source found indicates it has been released under Creative Commons. Thus, the image has been removed.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-4149976 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-4149976 Mon, 11 Feb 2019 20:30:06 +0000 wishun 1204404 It wouldn't be hard to put in an earlier plot thread regarding Raincoat Man.
Concerned parents could have reported a potential creeper around the playground about the time kids started going missing, for example.
That way the addendum would feel much more organic and less "a skeleton jumped out".

Also, even if they don't give in to the relatively mild compulsion, some distraught mom would absolutely think her poof-ed kid was "just hiding" and crawl in to search.
I notice that there were "██ reported disappearances", and nowhere does it specify missing children. So that probably shouldn't count as a ding. But in my opinion, it would be stronger to directly state that there are also vanished adults/teens.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-2821299 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-2821299 Mon, 15 May 2017 08:12:25 +0000 WarpZone 147364 I'd like to know where the Foundation got all these Class-D children to test it with, so they could collect the data telling them what age groups are the most susceptible, and at what range.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-2371836 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-2371836 Tue, 08 Sep 2015 14:41:36 +0000 SsnakeBite 1559819 Eeeeh… there isn't much to this one. People go there, disappear… and that's pretty much it. It's true that most of the time, keeping things simple is the best way to go but in that case, there isn't much meat to this SCP.

The inclusion of the raincoat-wearing person feels random too, and in fact comes off like it's an attempt at giving this SCP more personality and as other people have mentioned, it doesn't feel like it's actually connected to the playground (and there is no reason for the Foundation to cme to the conclusion that it is).

There are also logical issues like security camera being out for seven hours without anyone noticing until after the fact. It's also questionable that security cameras would be placed inside an office in the first place.

Plus it's another one that inexplicably draws people to it just so its effect can actually be activated and/or to raise the body-count and I feel it's become a bit of a cliché.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-2355552 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-2355552 Tue, 11 Aug 2015 06:14:35 +0000 DanThePlanMan 2035724 Meh. Thing what make ye disappear and become part of it. Beating a deceased equine.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-2210819 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-2210819 Mon, 19 Jan 2015 05:39:00 +0000 Soultear 1808168 Upvoted because old men in yellow raincoats that can mess up surveilance equipment, enter rooms without opening the door and making people dissappear are terrifying

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-2055840 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-2055840 Sat, 21 Jun 2014 15:00:26 +0000 1402828

…The camera resumes functioning approximately seven hours later, at which point Dr. R██████'s office is empty.

Why was security picking their noses for seven hours?

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1894128 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1894128 Sat, 16 Nov 2013 05:34:30 +0000 grewsome 1771403 This was pretty much my complaint as well. I think that this would be a better article if the part about the raincoat man was removed - but then there's not really much interesting stuff here. It's dull without the raincoat man, but at the same time it's simply too ambiguous with it.

The concept is okay but it needs something to make it actually worth caring about. Neutral vote from me.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1891335 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1891335 Tue, 12 Nov 2013 23:42:22 +0000 1472934 This. And what the person above said about Raincoat Guy having no defined ties to the playground…and that note, really? Why? Just, why? Why would that be there, why would it be that way that it is (like, without part of a normal report before it), why would the researcher have written it, why 'children' - I mean, the playground draws everyone - why does Raincoat Guy exist, why did he take the researcher, just, why? That's a few too many "why?"s to have about just one small part of the article. I mean, having a few "why?"s is good for an SCP, but too many = little to no hook = uninteresting.

Upvoted for being a scip.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1657386 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1657386 Tue, 18 Dec 2012 10:58:01 +0000 Litfried 1391439 I didn't think he was supposed to be. It was my view that he somehow had heard of a place where you can essentially turn invisible around a lot of children, and wanted to exploit that.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1591126 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1591126 Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:13:43 +0000 Leon de Leon 1427195 I upvoted, but it seems like it could be scarier, or at least more interesting. There's something missing that I can't place my finger on.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1556280 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1556280 Wed, 05 Sep 2012 00:37:05 +0000 Lumancer 662776 See, the addendum is interesting, but the article doesn't provide any evidence that Mr. Raicoat is linked to this SCP. That bugs me a lot.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1556253 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1556253 Tue, 04 Sep 2012 23:55:55 +0000 thedeadlymoose 732274 The addendum earns my upvote.

In TEH FUTURE, apparently this wasn't enough.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1443028 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1443028 Wed, 09 May 2012 03:57:00 +0000 Dexanote 481882 I actually really like this as it is. I don't think a test log can possibly improve it.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1434067 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1434067 Tue, 01 May 2012 13:18:14 +0000 DrThorne 1248561 Right, I added just a tiny bit of stuff and rewrote the addendum a bit, since it bothered me. Hopefully this actually improves the general quality, as opposed to the other way around. Also, thanks to everyone who edited to fix grammar and wording.

I have some ideas for a test log, so I'll see if I can work on that.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1433690 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1433690 Tue, 01 May 2012 02:13:29 +0000 Doktori 1169549 Interesting. Upvoted.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1433489 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1433489 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 22:54:22 +0000 TL333s 1304786 I still like this and you got my vote.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1433358 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1433358 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 20:36:50 +0000 Backelaer 1323848 I also like the idea. Some minor points that can be improved. (Like the containment procedures mentioned here. And there should be some form of testing being done, aside from that's what the Foundation does, it could also make it more interesting.)

But I like the potential here. A good idea which is poorly executed is still way better than the other way around imo. I'll remain neutral for now.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1433351 Re: :( http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1433351 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 20:30:24 +0000 ChazzK 1203158 Yes it's possible, that's what the entire concept of "private security" is all about. They are fully allowed to use reasonable force in the extraction of individuals from private property, and yes there would be both posted material and live guards to make sure people didn't start wandering in.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1433140 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1433140 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 17:42:24 +0000 Sorts 323478 I like it, despite the compulsion. At least it's not a 100% compulsion, but … eh. There's good promise here, from the vanishing kids playing forever and the creeper watching them from afar. If you can focus on those two things and clean up the rest it is going to be a winner.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1433056 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1433056 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 16:34:35 +0000 SoullessSingularity 637830 Oh man I want to like this idea so much, but as before there are issues that I trust will be fixed in time. No vote for now, and hopefully an upvote when things are more clean.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1432947 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1432947 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 15:11:09 +0000 Crayne 1346995 You still have some tone issues ("severely increased" is hardly clinical) and while I like the idea of a playground being an SCP, I'm pretty sure the 'X lures all into interacting with it and then they vanish' thing has been done before. For now a downvote, but I'll definitely consider changing that to an upvote should you decide to rewrite and clean it up.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1432899 Re: :( http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1432899 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:36:01 +0000 EchoFourDelta 515520 That's not the only thing. I simply start with the most piddling and trivial of things, since those are the things that the author should have gotten right.

"Special Containment Procedures: SCP-1094 is kept within Site-94, a containment site disguised as an office building belonging to a private company. Attempts made by civilians to enter Site-94 should be deterred, with force should it be necessary. No personnel are to be enter the established safe zone around SCP-1094 except during authorized testing sessions. Personnel expressing interest in interacting with SCP-1094 are to be moved from the site immediately."

It's not really possible for a private company to use any sort of force to remove civilians from anywhere, since they're not a governmental agency with the any sort of legal mandate or authorization to do .

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1432892 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1432892 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:30:04 +0000 DrThorne 1248561 The locked box test. You can lock it away and it will do nothing.

Also, that's an interesting interpretation.

EDIT: Ninja'd by Pauli133. It's still true though.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1432891 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1432891 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:29:56 +0000 pauli133 1313727 cause it's locked in a really big box.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1432888 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1432888 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:24:19 +0000 Anonymouse99 1308153 Why is this safe? It's implied that there is an invisible or somehow paranormal creature that takes the subjects away and not just an effect of being on the equipment, I would call it euclid.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1432884 Re: :( http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1432884 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:18:03 +0000 DrThorne 1248561 I actually wasn't aware of that.

Thank you.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1432878 Re: :( http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1432878 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:09:21 +0000 pauli133 1313727 ISO 8601 is our friend.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1432876 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1432876 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:04:33 +0000 Eskobar 1173523 Regarding #2: Like I said, it's up to you. You can either add another redacted digit to the number of times the SCP's primary anomalous property has been tested (though "redact moar" is almost never a good idea), or modify the Special Containment Procedures section to include sentences like "Personnel are to be forbidden access to SCP-1094 except during authorized testing sessions" followed by regulations for how that testing is to be carried out. But the Foundation would be loathe to just keep something without having tested the unholy bejeezus out of it first, and that rigor doesn't seem to have happened.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1432872 Re: :( http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1432872 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:01:28 +0000 DrThorne 1248561 A mistake on my part. Fixed.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1432870 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1432870 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 13:59:39 +0000 DrThorne 1248561 Right-o. Answers for you.

1. Personally, I didn't consider that something of actual importance and redacting it was really just a way of getting it out there so I could work on the meat of the article. You do have a point though, I'll fix that.

2. I think I see what you mean, but I don't really have any ideas for that. Any suggestions?

3. That was a mistake on my part. I'll get it fixed.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1432869 :( http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1432869 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 13:59:16 +0000 EchoFourDelta 515520 Downvoted for 19/5/19. No professional organization in the world uses notation like that. See how it's not possible to tell the day from the year for 1/3 of a century?

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1432861 (no title) http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1432861 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 13:51:16 +0000 Eskobar 1173523 Mmkay, some questions n' comments.

1. Why is the Site number redacted? You can just pick a number at random, go to whichever page on the wiki details the canonical Site numbers, and make sure it isn't one of those. In actual containment situations, it would be important to know the Site number for the object, in case someone needed to get to it.

2. The Containment Procedures show no mechanism in place for actually testing the object, even though it has been fairly lightly-researched—only nine or fewer (judging from the redaction) times. I understand if you don't want to add a big testing log, because I hate them too, but you might explain more thoroughly "we just tested the living shit out of it, and there's nothing else to see here." Or add in something in the containment procedures about how one would go about testing it, either one.

3. Do you mean for the pivotal event in the article to happen in 2019? I would consider moving it back to slightly in the past rather than the future; while I have never minded articles that appear to be written in the future, a lot of people tend to think it breaks immersion.

All in all, not a bad article, but it doesn't quite grip me enough for an upvote. No vote for now.

]]>
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190#post-1432853 New SCP http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-465190/scp-1094#post-1432853 Mon, 30 Apr 2012 13:34:29 +0000 DrThorne 1248561 Right, second try.

So, I looked this one over one last time. I fixed all the typos, dumb wording and off tone that I found. So hopefully this will be good enough.

…I hate my lack of self-confidence.

Anyway, if you find typos or wording or something minor like that I'd appreciate if you pointed out exactly what it was, because I won't notice it myself. If you feel like it you can go ahead and fix it yourself.

]]>
http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/feed/forum/t-465190.xml
scp-wiki.wikidot.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2019-51
27849
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:PH7AZLDOVRIGKRCHTM4JONP3LLRXMB4J
<urn:uuid:869f180e-e295-4513-9255-00fb7929f48a>
2019-12-10T19:50:23Z
107.20.139.170
application/rss+xml
sha1:DRQKYZHAIRF47HPCITDEFICOB56AMNUY
<urn:uuid:548701b3-6748-495d-8460-bffbbbb002ac>
http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/feed/forum/t-465190.xml
response
<urn:uuid:be344e31-1105-41cd-bc1e-43718a0b7270>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2019-51
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for December 2019
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-198.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.16 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.1-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/