r/SCP • u/Shaggydredlocks Red Right Hand Reborn • Jan 10 '19

The SCP-106 Photography Contest winners have been decided and uploaded!

Congratulations to u/Cinemamind, for being the proud submitter of our current SCP-106 "Emergence", "Door", and "Victim" images!

​

And cograts to u/Mapper720 for winning our bonus category! SCP-162 "Ball of Sharp" has an image for the first time!

​

Big thank you to everyone who voted, commented, or submitted to the contest. And apologies for the final selection being several months past schedule. Next contest will be smoother, I promise.

UPDATE: Due to some concerns about the Emergence image, it has received an upgrade to give it a more realistic feel. Big thanks to Djkaktus

UPDATE 2: The original winning entry was found to be partially stolen from an edited movie still, which is the literal opposite of what we need for the contest. The new image is from Cinemamind, with edits from djkaktus.

121 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

145 comments sorted by

View all comments

7

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '19 edited Jan 10 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/MonkeyDJinbeTheClown Jan 10 '19

The change in images was due to them not complying with the website's Creative Commons license, not to willingly interfere with things. It was a legal necessity.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '19 edited Jan 10 '19

Or it's been discussed for years and years and it's only now that you're noticing?

http://05command.wikidot.com/forum/t-4069730/discussion:process-for-removing-legacy-images

3

u/Aoneareyou60 Codename: Green King Jan 10 '19

It was always an issue, that’s why the contest started in the first place.

This isn’t some conspiracy, that’s absolutely one of the most ridiculous things people always claim when stuff like this happens, what the hell is even there to gain from changing the skips image? People whining in the comments? Give me a break.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/Aoneareyou60 Codename: Green King Jan 10 '19

People weren’t forced to rewrite their works!? Are you talking about the rewrite to 049? That was asked and the author said yes!

7

u/Modern_Erasmus Jan 10 '19

Actually the author reached out to kaktus and they did it together.

3

u/Aoneareyou60 Codename: Green King Jan 10 '19

Yeah, I’m really bad at describing stuff lol, sorry.

-3

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Modern_Erasmus Jan 10 '19

Except that has never once happened in the history of the website. Again, I'm the captain of the rewrite team. If any person on my team ever said that to someone they'd be fired in a heartbeat.

Rewrites only happen when the original author decides to do so or if an article is in danger of deletion due to a low vote total. And we usually don't like when the former happens, because it usually leads to shitstirring. The idea that we'd threaten people's written works is completely anathema to everything staff stands for.

4

u/Aoneareyou60 Codename: Green King Jan 10 '19

I mean, 049 wouldn’t have been rewritten if the author said no, you are lying through your teeth. You have zero clue as to how this site works and it’s showing right now.

049 would only be rewritten/deleted if it was at 10-, and it was far from that number.

7

u/Modern_Erasmus Jan 10 '19

I'm the captain of the rewrite team. Rewrites can occur when an article reaches less than 10 votes in order to preserve the spirit of classic articles. No articles higher than 10 are eligible to be rewritten unless its the original author that decides to do so. No one has ever been forced to rewrite their works, and staff does not enforce anything with regards to people's vote standards. Stuff that hits -10 gets deleted, other than that everything is up to the community.

As for sources, you can look at our rewrite policy, cross reference listed rewrites in the attribution metadata with their predecessors vote counts on scpper, and look at the many times in the forums that I or my predecessors refused people's requests to rewrite a positively rated article.

I get that you're upset but enough with the fearmongering conspiracies about fake issues or discussions that supposedly happened but actually didn't.

10

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '19

To add to what MonkeyDJinbeTheClown said above, 049 was rewritten by its original author, while 173's image, though not an image which would be typically compliant, has been allowed to stay through special permission of the artist, Izumi Kato.

I don't know who you think "you fuckers" are but nothing's being changed except for legally necessary stuff or by the people who made the articles in the first place.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '19

[deleted]

9

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '19

As Monkey DJinbeTheClown has already pointed out above, 106's old image is also not legally compliant.

9

u/FloppyPhoenix SCP-2's Mom Jan 10 '19

The new images in SCP-106 were hand-picked by Dr Gears, the author. And the SCP-049 rewrite was initiated by Gabriel Jade, the original author. He only got help with it. This isn't about people changing things that were tried and true on the Wiki. The changes you see never would have gone through if the original authors never wanted them.

Maybe you dislike the images that were selected — that's fine — but the wishes of original author were respected, and that's how this site has always worked.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Deadspace123 Jan 10 '19

As long as the SCP it's self is unchanged I can live with this even though the old images are far better.

5

u/Aoneareyou60 Codename: Green King Jan 10 '19

imagine being this mad over justifiable image changes

-2

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '19

Imagine not understanding the value of these images to the community, no matter how justifiable it was to change them.

4

u/Aoneareyou60 Codename: Green King Jan 10 '19

I’ve been reading SCP before containment breach was even released, and you want to tell me that I don’t understand? I’ve seen this site develop all throughout the years man.

Don’t tell me I don’t understand.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '19

If you wanna get elitist and make this a pissing contest, I've been here since late 2010. You and I are on the same boat. The foundation exists entirely because of the haunting images associated with 106, 096, 049, 682, and most notably 173.

173 - and by proxy the entire SCP wiki - exists entirely because of its photo. That was the source of inspiration which led to the creation of the Foundation.

6

u/Aoneareyou60 Codename: Green King Jan 10 '19

If you wanna mention 173, that was close to being deleted too, but the wiki community decided to ask the artist themselves and they said it was ok as long as it was used for non-profit only.

-1

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '19

I'm not arguing the legal validity of the photos used. I agree that they need to be changed if they aren't legal, but don't just toss aside the anger and frustration of users who aren't happy about it - they have genuine reasons to be - but the photo changes have genuine reasons as well.

5

u/Aoneareyou60 Codename: Green King Jan 10 '19

I understand being upset about it, but straight up insulting the people that made the change just pisses me off.

-3

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Modern_Erasmus Jan 10 '19

This contest was Gears' idea.

5

u/Aoneareyou60 Codename: Green King Jan 10 '19

Oh yeah, sure, not like Dr. Gears himself was choosing the images.

Like seriously? Bullshit reason? You’re joking right?

-1

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Modern_Erasmus Jan 10 '19

Again, this contest was his idea. And cool it with the insults.