 Ahoy ahoy and welcome to the channel. I'm Dr. Sumerian, not a real doctor, and today we are going to talk about the list of things Bright's not allowed to do at the SCP Foundation. Somewhat briefly, I don't think there's like a whole lot to talk about here, but there's a big event that occurred on the SCP Wiki that I should talk about, so at least you're informed. First of all, without going into too much more detail, but there will be a link in the description to a video that does. The long and short of the problem with Dr. Bright, the author, is that Dr. Bright was using a reputation gained as a character on the SCP Wiki in certain offsite fandoms and using their reputation on the SCP Wiki itself and in SCP spaces to be a bit of what I guess could be considered creepy. I want to measure my words carefully for legal reasons, but in ways that could be considered by some people to be very creepy. I should say considered by me to be very creepy, and I have a video with actual evidence laid out for these, the things I'm talking about, but the problem is of course that Dr. Bright is not just a, the problem is Dr. Bright isn't just an author, Dr. Bright is a character on the SCP Wiki and a source of and subject of many very popular works. One of the most popular, nearly reignited at plus 2000 a week ago anyway, was the list of things Dr. Bright is no longer allowed to do at the SCP Foundation or something like that. It's just a blatant rip off of several other, like what is it, things Dr. Welsh is no longer allowed to do at a tabletop RPG, and then there's multiple military versions of it, stuff that private so and so is not no longer allowed to do. It's a whole thing. It's a blatant rip off of several different kinds of content that exist elsewhere on the internet. And on Sunday, a moderator who was retiring from the SCP Wiki, deleted the page. I'm actually not going to name that moderator for two reasons. One, I don't want to be directing hate anyone's way if people think that some for some reason this was the wrong thing to do, which it was the wrong thing to do, but we'll talk about that in a second. But more importantly, I don't want to, what's the word I'm looking for here? I don't want to raise up the actions of this individual because, oh gosh, this is a super complicated issue. So we're going to talk about the reasons why I think this was a bad call, but also morally correct. And you might be, how is it possible that those are two different things? And that is because the process of the way the SCP Wiki works is filled with red tape and delays. And sometimes those red tape and delays just puts actions on the back burner until people think about it again. There's so much content and things that need to be addressed in the SCP Wiki that a lot of times important things get ignored. And then someone will do something drastic and everyone will start talking about it again and then action will actually get taken. That's sort of what's happening right now because when this moderator deleted the list, staff immediately put the list back up and then seeing that the vote totals were trending downwards, protected it. They may have been protected first actually, but regardless, the page is at like negative 150 in rating right now. But to be fair, most of the articles originally like almost plus 2000. So it's hard to explain. When you delete an article off of the Wiki, there's no retention of votes. There's no retention of discussion pages. And this is the problem. Let's say for a second, you were to go, well, let's just look at its article rating right now. That's playing into the hands of the rogue moderator who did the rogue thing. Because of course, this person wants the page gone. So if you just go like, well, let's ignore the plus 2000 votes and only work on it right now, then you're doing what the person wanted anyway. This is the issue. I think the bright list should have been deleted a long time ago. I think staff should have come to a consensus about it. There should have been a process, an open discussion with the community, and it should have been deleted. It wasn't. However, if we allow the precedent of a random person gets to decide the course of the Wiki for 10 years, 20 years, 30 years into the future. And yes, I really do think the SAP Wiki could have that kind of staying power if we don't all die between now and then. If you allow one person to make those decisions, it will be abused. Period. End of story. And the worst thing is the SAP Wiki is on Wiki. right now. And there is no easy way to, and this is another good reason for Wiki Jump to go to our own website, but there's no easy way to keep track of what's deleted. In fact, this person could have deleted multiple other articles that weren't as popular and we might not have noticed it. It's almost certain that that didn't happen. But the thing is that you can't be sure that someone isn't going to go and find some plus three tale that was written six years ago and deleted off the Wiki and no one notices for a long time. And maybe even by the time that backups are no longer available for it. There was a backup the list, by the way. That's how it got reposted. Right now staff is actually beginning the process of taking action. Although I hope that there is a, that this is not a precedent setting decision. And also I hope that staff takes this as an opportunity to examine how they affect change. Now, I'll say this, staff is not a monolith. It's a group of different teams working together and that naturally creates delays because you have to communicate between. And it naturally creates creates a lot of red tape because you have multiple people that have to sign off on certain things. This is fine. But when something like this falls through the cracks and requires someone to take a drastic and a drastic unprecedented and frankly serious abuse of power, I don't want to call it abusive, but it's an abuse of power to make something happen, to make the change actually go into effect. I feel as though your system is bad. And that is something that I hope gets examined over the next year or so. You take too long to make decisions. So over the next year, hopefully you can come up with a decision on why you take so long to make decisions. I know that sounds ridiculous, but it is the way the Wiki works right now. But I will say this, I mentioned this in my video on Tuesday that I was personally removing Dr. Bright from all of my works on the SCP Wiki. I have also recently, in conjunction with Cactus, although Cactus is the one who spearheaded this at the beginning with, I just thought about, I was just going to remove Dr. Bright from my works. Cactus came up with the solution that I actually was suggesting in my video, independently of myself. And I've decided to glom on and do the same thing. But Cactus has replaced Dr. Bright with Dr. Elias Shaw. And I'm going to do the same thing. Not going to. I have already done the same thing. Every article of mine that contains Dr. Bright has been switched out, word pluriplace for Dr. Shaw. And it's surprisingly easy and surprisingly simple. And you'll be like, what do you mean? Dr. Shaw is essentially the same thing as Dr. Bright with a different name. A name that's not attached to actual abuse cases, actual harmed, actual people. And I think that's good. That's good. I will say this, if you'd like to participate in the discussion, there is an open thread on the SCP Wiki. I will also include a link to that in the description, just below the video explaining the Bright situation. If you'd like to make your comments known and you're a member of the SCP Wiki, that's a good place to go do it. If you're not a member of the SCP Wiki, you should become a member of the SCP Wiki and figure this stuff out. But anyway, thanks for watching. If you enjoyed the video, hit the subscribe button, hit the notification bell next to that, so you're notified when I upload new videos. And then head on over to patreon.com forward slash D Sumerian, pledged at any level like everybody here on the screen already has, including Sinjeriki, who is pledged at $100. It's nice to know that I'm not alone out here. And I will see you all again on Tuesday, I promise.