Video summary
Bu videoda konuşmacı, SCP Viki topluluğundaki Dr. Bright karakteri ve buna bağlı "Duckman" olayının son gelişmelerini ele alıyor. Dr. Bright, yazarının gerçek hayattaki davranışları nedeniyle topluluktan uzaklaştırılan popüler bir kurgusal figür olup, bu durumun ardından Bright Works projesi aracılığıyla karakterin viki üzerindeki çoğunlukla varlığı kaldırılmaya çalışıldı. Konuşmacı, sosyal medyadaki öne çıkan yüzlerinden biri olarak yanlış bilgi yaymamak adına arka planda yapılan görüşmelerden aldığı güncellemeleri paylaşmak için bu eklemeyi hazırladığını belirtiyor ve genellikle bu karakter hakkında konuşulmadığını, ancak şimdi özel bir durum nedeniyle bilgilendirme yapılması gerektiğini vurguluyor.
Projenin üç ana bileşeni açıklanıyor: İlk olarak, Duckman'ın neden ettiği zararları ele alan ve kurbanlar veya diğer kullanıcıların yazdığı "yanıt parçaları" oluşturulacak; ancak bu yapıların tam zaman çizelgesi henüz belirlenmemiş durumda. İkinci olarak, bazı eserlerin metinleri korunup, zararlı unsurları ve etkilerini açıklayan dipnotlarla birlikte yayınlanacak şekilde hazırlanacak; bu süreçte "Akşam ile Bright" ve SCP-963 gibi eserler öne çıkıyor ve doğru etiketleme için acele edilmeyecek. Üçüncü olarak, Bright Works ekibinin karar verme süreci detaylandırılıyor; yılın başında yapılan beş öneriden biri seçilmiş ve bu doğrultuda karakterin etkisinin azaltılması hedeflenirken, altıncı bir öneri oylandıktan önce geri çekilmişti.
Sonuç bölümünde, Bright Works projesinin son değerlendirmesi (post-mortem) ele alınıyor; burada yapılan hatalar, iletişim eksiklikleri ve işlemlerde yaşanan gecikmeler kabul ediliyor ve personel özür diliyor. Değerlendirme süreci cezalandırmaktan ziyade, süreçleri inceleyip gelecekte benzer durumların önlenmesi için yeni yöntemler geliştirmeyi amaçlıyor; kullanıcılar hem kamuoyunda hem de özel olarak görüşlerini bildirebilecekler ancak eleştiriler kişisel saldırıya dönüşmeyecek. Ayrıca, Dr. Bright'in kullanımı tamamen yasaklanmamış olsa da, topluluk üyeleri bu karakteri içeren makaleleri genellikle düşük oyla karşılayarak onu gölgede bırakmayı tercih ediyor ve bu durumun otoriter bir yasa değil, site kültürünün bir yansıması olduğu belirtiliyor.
Read the full video transcript
Content warning, we have to talk about
Brite a little more today. For those of
you who are not in the know, Dr. Brite,
it was a very popular character on the
SCP database. Dr. Bright's author was
banned from the community for utilizing
their clout in writing one of SCP's most
famous characters to do some hecking
alleged grooming kind of things.
And so, not only was the author banned,
but because Dr. Brite was that author's
self-insert OC, and because many of the
things that the author allegedly did
were things that the character was
written to do as well, as well as the
character being used in a tool for said
grooming allegations.
The Bright Works project has been an SCP
Wiki team dedicated to removing Dr.
Brite from the majority of the SCP wiki
with rare exceptions. A couple days ago,
we ran through the Bright Works message,
which was an update from the Bright
Works team on what had happened. I
personally have been in contact with the
Bright Works project team behind the
scenes. Because I am one of the most
prominent faces of the SCP community on
social media outside the wiki, it is
pertinent for me to understand the
happenings of the website as best I can
so that I do not spread misinformation.
And I have been given some information
to share with you some updates, some
additional intel, which is why we have
to handle this today. So a reminder,
typically on this channel, we do not
talk about the Dr. Brite character at
all. The only reason the character is
brought up ever is when I have to
educate about what had happened and why
we don't talk about Bruno, so to speak.
Today's a special case where I have an
update on the whole scenario. You are
going to be informed and then we will
once again stop talking about that
character. One reason that the character
of Dr. bright will still remain on the
SCP database despite being mostly
removed is what are called response
pieces. The plan for response pieces is
for them to be works written by the duck
man's victims or other wiki users that
address the harm the duck man caused
through both their works and the
character Brite. Their exact form will
depend on the person writing the piece.
Staff will be keeping a close eye on any
and all response pieces that are
published. There's currently no solid
timeline as to when the infrastructure
for response pieces will be set up.
Response pieces alongside the
annotations are considered to be
long-term projects by the Bright Works
project team. That's segment one. Now,
segment two, annotated works. The Bright
Works project team have retained the
full text of some of the Duckman's works
with the intent of releasing them with
annotations. For those who are
unfamiliar with the term, annotations
are footnotes or commentary.
So they will be released with footnoted
commentary throughout the article. These
annotations will focus on pointing out
the harmful elements in the annotated
works and their impact. Works slated for
annotation include the tale an evening
with bright as well as SCP 963. As I
said above, there isn't a timeline on
the annotations because the team view
getting them right as incredibly
important. We don't want to publish
annotated works that are incorrectly or
insufficiently annotated as this will
cause more harm. Section three, how did
the Bright Works project team decide how
they were going to handle this? The
actions of the Bright Works project team
weren't decided at random. Staff voted
on a total of five proposals earlier
this year, all of which had different
methods of dealing with the Duckman's
remaining presence on the wiki, such as
their works. The proposals are available
on the '05 command wiki at the
semi-public bright works proposals
drafts hub. There was a sixth proposal
which was withdrawn before voting began.
In the end, staff vote selected the
remove and counterbrite's influence
proposal. This proposal is what the
Bright Works Project team has been
following ever since. Next section, the
Bright Works Project post-mortem. While
the Bright Works Project has made many
strides in addressing the Duckman's
works, their contribution to the works
of others, etc. It's no secret that the
Postmortem wasn't perfect. There's been
a number of failures on the part of
staff when it comes to the Bright Works
project, such as insufficient
communication, as well as the length of
time it took staff to take down the Duck
Man's works. The community as well as
the wider SCP community has criticized
staff for their failing and staff as a
whole apologizes. We should have been
better and the fact that we weren't is
unforgivable. Please note the we there
is staff apologizing I am not part of
this scenario. I am reading their words
verbatim. In order to address these
failings, the Bright Works project
postmortem has been established. It will
number one examine the processes and
structures involved in the execution of
the Bright Works project. Number two,
determine what about them worked and why
it worked. Number three, determine what
didn't work and why it didn't work. And
four, come up with solutions and new
processes that will improve staff
processes in the future. Both users and
staff will have an opportunity to share
their thoughts on the postmortem. There
will be an option to share their
thoughts privately if they so choose
alongside posting publicly. Postmotive
staff are currently discussing the best
method to achieve this. Certain members
of staff who are heavily involved with
the Bright Works project will be
contacted directly for more in-depth
interviews. Anyone who is contacted for
an interview will have the option to
decline. Presently, there's a Q&A thread
on the wiki forums for questions about
the postmortem. In the SCP wiki forums,
you're looking for a post called
discussion bright works project
postmortem QA. I encourage anyone who
wants to ask questions about the
postmortem to do so there. Next section.
Will there be disciplinary or
anti-harassment team action as part of
the postmortem? No. The aim of the
postmortem is not to punish anyone. It's
to examine what went wrong and what
staff can do to improve and avoid a
similar situation happening in the
future. If anyone believes a member of
staff should face disciplinary or
anti-harassment team action due to
something related to the Bright Works
project, they should contact the
relevant team. I will also note that any
feedback provided to the postmortem team
is not the place to is not the place to
attack anyone staff or users. Rule zero
of the SCP wiki is don't be a dick and
we hope anyone provided feedback to the
postmortem will abide by it. Any
responses that do cross the line will be
ignored by the postmortem team. That is
the end of today's addendum. It was a
short addendum thankfully, but I have
cleared that even though this has not
been publicly released by the Bright
Works project team yet, they did give me
permission to share it with you all.
Update on the Dr. Brite situation. By
the way, you can still use Dr. Brite in
your articles. They haven't actually
banned the use.
Staff has not banned the use. But what
has happened is if you use Bright or
Shaw, the SCP wiki community who votes
on the articles is very likely to
downvote the article. So it's not the
wiki staff being authoritarian. It is
the wiki site culture, the membership
that's going to downvote you into
oblivion. And so that's all there is to
say about that today. Thankfully, we
don't need a whole 30 to 40 minute
endeavor for this.
Stay hydrated, chat. We're almost out of
the woods on this, I hope.