What Happened to Dr. Bright?
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 09. 2024
- A lot of stuff, as it turns out.
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.
Information on Daisy's situation: / 1630064563910594561
Original video by me on this topic: • We need to talk about ...
Bright art in thumbnail was created by gooeybun and can be found here: gooeybun.tumbl...
The image of Doctor Cimmerian was created by Perelka_L.
Channel art was created by TheVolgun
Probably gonna do a few more videos like this to cover other falls from grace in the community. If there's anyone else you're curious to know more about, let me know.
The only other three who I know fell from grave were the user who tried to take down 5004, CityToast who made the Unusual Cargo theme, and the person who wrote Harmony’s proposal. The last one is probably the most severe, since she reacted badly to the ban and nearly tried to dox some people + the shit she pulled with staff and what not
You should cover them all. It could be its own little series.
Wasn't the person who wrote 049, the plague doctor, banned and had their article rewritten by someone else because they were caught RPing with a minor?
WAR ON DRAMA/Dr Cimmerian Chronicles We Need Help Defeat Anits War On Hololive/Anime/Vtuber
I would like to know those that deleted about 500 or so articles when they left.
Dr Bright is no longer allowed on the SCP Wiki
Dr. Bright is not allowed to go anywhere near a computer monitor
Dr. Bright is not allowed within 500 feet of a minor
After breaking all the rules in the book, Dr Bright finally crossed the line
@@orsonzedddr bright is no longer allowed 100 feet within a school
@@josukehigashikata-jojolion8236 Dr. Bright must inform his neighbors of his classification as a sex offender
Dr. Shaw won't be a real replacement until someone writes a "List of Things Dr. Shaw is NOT Allowed to do at the Foundation".
You my good individual have inspired me!
I've heard there's an article titled Rate My Director that tries to be the successor of TDBINAtD.
@@EnriqueLaberintico I think we both know that "try" and "succeed" are very different things though.
"Dr. Shaw is NOT allowed to say "Git Gud" when someone dies"
if you know, you know
Brigth was linked with the lore of some humanoid spc like TJ (little brother). Not sure if he (as Shaw) is still related to him and some thers.
Its a bit sad to see the orgins of such a beloved character fall into disgrace. I can imgaine being you a person who has been apart of this community so long seeing this unfold being quite disheartening.
I had a friend who was such a huge fan of Dr bright we'd play games together since we were 16 and she made her usernames drbright loll
It has been many years now it feels odd to see something i used to laugh at and find fun with the stories turn out to be much darker than i expected
Feels like Ryan Haywood from Achievement hunter. I just couldn't watch them after that.
@SquashGuy02134 yeah makes sense. For me the auther character dr bright is easy to separate from the creep mostly because i never knew the duckmen and when i think of him i just imagine a crusty old man
And the character dr bright just reminds me of being 16 again playing games with my friend and they'd use his name for their user all the time lol
@@FalseLavender yeah, SCP is a little different because there is hundreds if not thousands of authors, so I can still enjoy it, but AH was so tight knit with so many inside jokes, I just can't. I have an Achivement haunter sweater, and I don't where it in public anymore.
@@SquashGuy02134 yeah good point that sucks
I only just got into this fandom perhaps a month or two ago, and I still feel betrayed. I point-blank refused to be interested in any of the recurring characters for most of that time. Dr. Bright was so prevalant I finally gave in and listened to some CZcams videos about him. They were chunks of The List, obviously, and I thought it was hilarious. Then I got hooked on the Bright family lore in general, and then I found out the original author got himself thrown off the platform for sexual harrassment.
I then had a long conversation with myself about how slamming my head against a wall and screaming at the sky wasn't going to solve any problems.
Joking. I swear I'm joking. My point is that I haven't been here very long and I'm still quite bitter about it.
This is a prime example of separating art from the artist. It’s a community copyright, ban the guy and lock his work. But it’s a collective and just cutting out history is counter productive when dr bright makes up such a significant hunk of lore.
I understand the idea of separating art from the artist and generally I tend to agree with that idea, but I feel like in this scenario in which the creator of bright uses the popularity of the art to take advantage of people that it kinda makes it hard to separate them. Its definitely a drastic action but I feel like its a needed one to set an example for the future.
@@spoot2687 but that's just the creator being a foul human being. the character wasn't in on the scheme or endorcing it so why delete it?
@@ruikirisame1744 I suppose thats true, either way I feel like getting rid of him from past stuff entirely is a bit much, I'd much rather they just focus on making this not happen again in the future rather than trying to cover up the past, the Dr. Bright list had to go though
@@spoot2687 i slightly disagree with the removal of the bright list but i understand that at this point the list has so many youtube videos about it that it's not that big of a deal.
but yeah. fix the future, don't cover the past. last thing i want is to see a multifaceted character like bright being treated like vordemort.
This is a prime example of a commentor refusing to use critical thought. Ban the guy, lock his work, and allow people to make their own judgements and edits where they feel the need to. When you take into account that Bright the character was written as a power fantasy and direct OC representing Bright the author? Nah, leaving it alone is just personally scummy and makes those who support that potentially complicit - and given that there's no actual policy, but rather some individuals just Find/Replacing his name on some documents, there's no actual issue.
I still like the character dr Bright. Banning a character because of what the creator has done is absurb.
Other then that. Fuck Duckman. Love the character.
Tell this to the latam SCP fans. Many got used to know him as dr Brigth instead of Shawn.
@@jorgebellidolavado6382???
@@destroyerofturtles5024 See scp explicado, Jomoshu and some others. I dont see a page (in spanish) where his name is Shawn instead of Brigth, not mention his ffamily tree like an O-5 member, the agent cowboy, etc.
@@destroyerofturtles5024 i believe he meant to says. "Tell this to (i dont know) SCP Fans. Many got used to know him as Dr. Bright instead of Shaw."
Much like McCree/Cassidy of Overwarch, Dr Bright/Shaw's name is already too ingrained in most people's heads and it will take years to replace the name, if that's even possible. Hell, it'll probably be harder in the case of an SCP character considering how much off-site attention the articles get
True, I never really went to the wiki until quite recently because I first got into the SCP Foundation in like 2020 before all the SCP animation channels either died, began making their vids needlessly longer and longer, or turned out to be soulless corporations from central Asia and THEN died so I was completely oblivious to the actual Foundation site’s situation. I feel a bit guilty now, I just went to [REDACTED] Comicon and [REDACTED]con as Dr. Bright (not Dr. Shaw)
What did mcree do
McCree, McCree, McCree 👍
No internet community is safe from creeps.
speaking as a bisexual, ur correct, we have a lot of pedos masquerading in the community atm lol
Ikr
Exactly. So be vigilant. Believe victims. Eternal vigilance is the price we have to pay.
It's sad that so many people who create great pieces of work end up being absolute nonces. But at least I can continue to hail Cimmerian and Clef.
What about DJ Cactus?
I don't believe adminbright ever produced "great pieces of work."
@@trintavoni still loke some of the person's works ngl, like the Factory 001 proposal, the others tho...
@@alphatoomega7949 I was just listing some of my favourites so far, I haven’t seen them yet.
I mean, the character was popular because it was a great character, and some of things he produced were actually funny or well written, but then again - he did fuck up all his writing by having to be a kid fiddler.
Why does this always happen on the internet in every community?
The kinds of people who spend so much time online to be core members of an online community are often disconnected from reality and regular society and thus are more likely to be weird sex perverts. Not that you don't have sex perverts IRL in positions of authority, but you have a lot of them on the internet where they can get away with it more regularly.
I know how you feel seriously even only trying to get into unproblematic communities doesn’t work out sometimes💀
Unfortunately being on the internet gives a lot people the misconception that they are able to act however they want because the internet isn't "the real world" and feel they should be immune from consequences.
Immature people gaining power.
Power brings out folks toxicity
as a relatively new member of this community but long time lurker, i loved this character. in fact i even made a necklace that looks like 963 just because i was such a fangirl and i wanna cosplay him, and now it kind of ruined everything when i found out everything. it's quite sad really because i really REALLY despise pedophilia and apparently i was simping on a character that's made by one. the night i found out, I literally cried.
I feel your pain. I was a big of Achievement Hunter for the entirety of my teenage years, especially Ryan Haywood. Then when it was revealed a year or two ago that Haywood had been doing some gross shit for years, it fucking SUCKED. Hell, a number of my mannerisms today are based on the AH crew and him! Granted, the group quickly did called in an investigation and subsequently expelled him from the company, but still…
@@TheActualMrLinkI was just about to say the same thing. I can't watch AH anymore. It's ruined.
Same bro.
I usually just separate creation and creator
@@TheActualMrLink You feel her pain? ... why do I feel like you're asking for an SCP 590 joke...
My interpretation of how Dr. Shaw ended up with his name:
SCP-3812's personalities agreed to rewrite the timeline, leading to the Bright family's names be changed to Shaw, also changing Adam and Jack to Ansel and Elias. Alongside, they allowed Elias to see thru the 4th wall, the actual reason his name was changed.
This honestly makes the change to Dr. Bright better for me, as it makes canonical sense.
Someone needs to make this cannon
@@TheKeller101 I'll make it canon whenever I'm old enough to write. My canon will get pretty funky with the O5s including O5-12.
Fictional Bright is better than his twisted author
agreed
by a slim margin, at that
Wait, isn't Dr bright literally clinically insane? He's trying his best to keep the last of his humanity.
@@CalvinNoire I mean for a dude who’s soul is trapped inside a necklace, I don’t blame the dude for being insane a bit
My version of bright one time:
Groped a woman at a party for a dare
Literally wrote himself up for that in shame
Nobody cared because "yeah but he's _Dr. Bright™_ he does this shit"
And this basically traumatized him, because when you can do shit like that and people react in the opposite way... yeah i would be scared shitless too ngl
Its dumb how dr. Bright got wiped from scp foundation just because of the author. I hate when ever that that happens. Just cause the authors bad doesn't mean you have to wipe there creations of the face of tge Earth. Ban the person, keep the characters and if needed edit the characters so they're fine for the public.
Sorry I needed to vent about that.
That's why it's better to forcibly adopt the character. That's why people are starting to call him Elias Shaw
@@chetarisin3035 i won't except the compromise. his name is Jack Bright, his brother is thomas bright. what the author did was horrible and we should shun that terrible human being from polite society but i won't change the name, one that has become so close to the scp community as a whole. i respect other peoples opinions and am sorry for the vicitims but i will always consider jack bright as canon.
@@SCP-Dr_BrightPREACH!
PREACH!
the only bright related media I wanna see relegated to the dustbin is the "doctor doctor doctor" tale where they go into weird sexual detail about Bright possessing a 13 year old girl
things dr bright is not allowed to do at the scp foundation: Solicit minors and/or his coworkers for sex
things we shouldn't do; make jokes about it
@@trintavon Things we are no longer allowed to do at the scp foundation : Make jokes
@@trintavon oh boy, I wonder what sort of skeletons you're hiding in your closet.
@@trintavon Things we should do: Make jokes about people who don't want others to make jokes about it.
@@robertm3329 It's a dream fan not an SCP fan. Anything he says isn't valid.
Real bright can go bye bye but i REALLY don't want character bright to leave!
I really don't understand the dislike of the earlier works. They are short, interesting ideas, and the ones I read first, and think of them with much fondness. Not ever article needs to be this in depth over thought piece of literature.
They are what started the SCP and as such should be remembered as the ground breakers that built a community.
Well, that's why the legacy articles exist, no? Is that what they are called? They have an in-universe name, right? I forgor 💀
At the end of the day I’ll miss the character dr bright but at the same time I understand and respect the communities actions to the situation.
Fortunately we have Dr -Original- Shaw to replace him.
@@flazzorb so so true I like Shaw so far
@@flazzorbHonestly, I would rather having Dr. Shaw as a character of his own rather than the blatant replacing Dr. Bright.
@@talesfromunderthemoon That's the idea of calling him Dr Original.
At the end of the day, Dr Jack Bright as shown in the SCP Universe is a character, and characters can and do get replaced in a story. For numerous reasons.
Just so happens the reason isnt narrative this time around, and said reason is,,,bleh,,,
At least the replacement will be good, I hope
I can understand how having the character still around might cause some discomfort to individuals who were affected by Duckman's behavior, but I don't believe cutting the character out of the wiki is a good solution. You're hurting the community as a whole out of what is essentially spite and an emotional response. It amounts to punishing everyone else for the actions of one bad actor.
And I know I've barked up this tree before and nobody cared to listen, maybe it isn't my place, I get it. But I've started to notice similar things happen in other spaces, which is what has me so concerned about it. Critical Role was a recent example that really made me sit up and take notice. (Not because I watch it regularly, but more so because it does have a large fanbase so the name is notable.) I bring it up because Critical Role deleted what was presumed to be hundreds of hours of content in order to remove every reference to one of their cast members who had been accused of similarly grave misdeeds.
If this precedent becomes the normal way of handling these situations, it presents a significant problem when it comes to maintaining integrity of content and canon. Especially given how social mores are subject to change over time; an individual could do nothing wrong- at the time he took those actions- but later be condemned and have all his content and all the content based off of his contributions purged. Not to mention the possibility that this mechanism could be abused by bad actors making false allegations to oust a rival.
The environment this fosters is not good for creators, and it is not good for the audience. I hope you will at least give my line of reasoning here some consideration, for your own sake if nothing else.
Part of my reasoning exactly, so many people have put years of work into the character and to take that away from them and disregard all their work simply because one person did something bad is just unfair. Also if your interested try looking up the Kwite/Orion drama it basically involves Orion bringing up false allegations to ruin Kwites reputation and work because of personal issues they had with him.
They aren’t going to cut out the character. The worst thing that can happenn is that all the references to him is going to be changede to dr shaw
@@emil1842 Actually I’ve already seen people completely abandon or delete their works with Bright because of all this drama plus simply renaming the character won’t always make sense since Shaw and some other rewrites have different abilities and backstories/families.
@@Blake-xj9yj ok. I think that no one has written anything new about Shaw yett, as the newest article is still 7001. So authors have actually rewritten their works in adition to changing the name,since you said that Shaw has a different backstory?
@@emil1842 There hasn’t been an article made for Shaw on the wiki yet but if you follow Daisy they’re one of the co-creators of Shaw, they’ve been sharing information on him and his family. He has somewhat altered abilities and the family members will all be replaced too. He also won’t have an amulet. For now though people on the wiki seem to just be using Shaw as a rename instead of a different character.
Letting this fade by just accepting that Dr Bright (the fictional character) is distinct from their author rather than being like an open infected wound by having a proxy character named Dr Shaw be shoehorned into a Dr Bright shaped hole probably be best for SCP and having something like this come up every week or two because someone mentions Dr Shaw which starts the whole incident over from scratch.
Yeah I think letting the character fade out naturally, maybe like Dr Iceberg, would have been better especially since no one on the wiki really used Dr Bright for a long time. Now anytime someone mentions Dr Bright or Dr Shaw it turns into a whole argument which doesn’t really sound good for anyone involved be it scp fans or the victims themselves since it might bring up old trauma.
@@Blake-xj9yj 'Death of the author' is probably better since the character of Dr Bright is what got many people into the SCP fandom , these are the kind of people who also liked "2550+ things Mr. Welch can no longer do during an RPG" or "Skippy's list" , and removing him would mean that an important part of the lore would be removed for these people.
@@Blake-xj9yjthe best way to kill an idea is through apathy. If you try to hide Dr Bright, which by the way most people don’t realize is an author, it will only bring more attention to him and cause further problems. Sometimes the best medicine is to leave things alone and just tacitly discourage or ignore it.
@@1973WashuThe character got me into the fandom. I chose to let my version express his contempt for his “creator.” (In quotes due to other people writing for him and not all the one asshole.)
Couldn't they just black box Bright's name?
I know it's much harder for others to truly separate the art from the artist, but for me it's the easiest thing. I still like the Dr. Bright character (as "Dr. Bright"), and nothing that happens outside the SCP universe can change that. Fuck the person, love the character. Also, so many people have incorporated him into their own stories and SCPs, which, in my opinion, makes him more than just Duckman's character. Dr. Bright is an iconic character (especially off-site) and I still like him in isolation, and that won't change for me just because of the awful actions of the original creator. It's also unfortunate that people who still like Dr. Bright, and don't want to use Dr. Shaw, will be downvoted to deletion by the community and will just have to post it elsewhere. To me, that's incredibly unfortunate. It's also a bit confusing when some people rename Dr. Bright to Dr. Shaw in their articles, but others do not.
This is a similar situation to what happened with the Overwatch character Jesse McCree (named after one of the devs), who was renamed to Cole Cassidy (still think they could've come up with something cooler) after it came out that the real guy did some truly awful shit. There was a big discussion online about whether they should've done it or not. Some still call the character by his original name, most do not (because of new players who don't know about this). I still MUCH prefer the original name because it's way cooler, but I've gotten used to the new one.
I'm quite stubborn when it comes to change.
I feel about the same way you do.
As a status quo lover, I guess I got lucky that I discovered SCP in 2020. I can casually use Dr. Shaw like it was always that way.
@@EnriqueLaberintico Yup, that's how it goes with these things. New people don't have to deal with past drama or changes.
People who know who "Dr. Bright" was will continue to use it instead of "Dr. Shaw," or will choose to switch to using "Dr. Shaw" (the realistic outcome), or end using them interchangeably depending on whether they're talking to others that know who "Dr. Bright" was.
@@EnriqueLaberintico What? AdminBright got kicked off the site in 2022.
@@ceinwenchandler4716 but I was here for less time, so the name wasn't carved as deep in my head.
If a person can't separate a character in the universe from an author then that's their own personal problem and they need to fix that problem with themselves. I have already wrote a script that replaces The text for Dr Shaw to Dr Bright that way I can read articles in their purest form.
Wait, you mean when you come across an article that uses the name Dr. Shaw, you have a program that changes it to Dr. Bright for you? Cool. How did you do that? Would a tech-illiterate plebe like myself even understand? ...also, I just like the name Dr. Bright better. It sounds better. I think one of my characters was briefly named Dr. Shaw... I was trying to get a very specific joke to work with her full name. It's Lydia Natasha Azhuar Shaw Atkinson. (It's also complicated.) Or, if you turn it into an acronym - Lydia N.A.S.A. Which is how she always puts it on legal documents, much to the annoyance of everyone who then has to deal with her strangely organized paper trails.
and you ad it like a chrome extention or hpw does that work I would like to use this for myself
@@stepan6457 just a script you can write to work with grease monkey
If anyone would like to read articles/tales without the Shaw replacement or find deleted works with Bright then the Wayback Machine is pretty handy although it is a bit slow.
If you want to read SCP articles with Dr. Bright's name instead of Shaw, then use something called interactivefics. It's a Chrome extension, so unfortunately can only be used on a desktop or laptop
I know it's hard to do "separate creation from creator" especially when Dr Bright is basically a sona of adminbright but as someone who were obsessed with Dr Bright as a character back in my scp phase, even roleplaying, I have to say I'm rather attached and don't really want to erase him
I mean, as a character he's interesting enough, and just replacing him with a random ass character just... Doesn't work well for me
Idk, I just hate changes, and idk if making fanart about him is ok or if I want to anymore
100% agree
@@stargazer-elite so I still made fanart and rp as him :D👍
I hate people calling Jack Bright a "pedophile character" just because the creator was a horrible person. Dr Bright the character is not a pedophile and it's sad people feel this way about such a great character.
This killed the enjoyment of the character for me. I like the idea of Dr. Shaw, but this went from a subtle discussion about when art outgrows the artist to unenjoyable discussions about the creator.
I've never been involved with a Fandom before, but this quit being fun some time ago.
It's gotten to the point on Tik Tok where it's become political about which character you support, and I'm done with both of them now.
The only thing I want to see from them is a chainsaw battle to permanent death.
Same honestly all this fandom drama has been a huge turn off for me and a lot of other people too 💀
Good. The character isn't worth shit, anyways. This shouldn't *be* a subtle discussion; what adminbright did is wrong and reflects poorly on the wiki and to "subtly" discuss it (practically speaking, brush it under the rug) so as to allow others their enjoyment is to morally abstain.
Me: (laughs in [REDACTED]) how abouth *_BØŤH_* =D
@@trintavon honestly the character Dr. Bright is fine, the guy who created him is problematic
@@greywolf9783yeah I just really do not want to replace Dr Bright he's way too funny we should just separate the art from the artist as my opinion of what the community should do
I for one can separate the creator from the creator, despite them being a scumbag.
Erasing the character only GIVE more power to the creator when doing so.
Even though it should, Dr. Shaw will never replace Dr. Bright in my brain, I've already grown accustomed to the name Dr. Bright and since that I will always prefer calling him Dr. Bright. But I won't respect the author of the character, just the character, I don't care about the damn author anymore.
I feel like Dr. Jack Bright should remain as a character in the SCP universe as I feel the character has outgrown its original author, in the same way the Harry Potter characters and franchise has kinda outgrown J.K. Rowling and her Anti-Trans views
Rowling still makes money off the franchise. One is allowed to have personal attachment to the stories but there is no way to pretend she has no connection to it.
Duckman actively used his character to get close to and hurt young people. There is no way to separate him from the character because of this. For many, especially those he hurt- the two are synonymous.
@@armorparade fair enough
...and thia is why i claimed bright as one of my charachters and went "yeah hes immortal and likes cool flashy shit like chainsaws and... hes chill. Also he has anomalous rizz and that terrifies his psyche Evangelion ep26 style"
What will i feed my hyperfixation now??? Like, I'm not somebody who keeps up with the actual SCP database lore, so I just found out about this today, and while I do agree that the Duckman sucks... Man, I've literally imprinted on the character Bright...
Just separate character from creator...maybe?
The fact that this was known years ago to people and yet the staff tried to hide it under the rug
Literally this it really makes me mad that the same people who push the responsibility of the character and creator onto the fans who had no control over the situation, will completely absolve the staff of any wrongdoing.
What I want to know is what's gonna happen to SCP-963, 590, and 321.
Probably nothing but there will be rewrites of 963 and 590 that will coincide with the original articles if I remember correctly
mentions of the articles by other authors and also his other family members had their names changed, some just their surnames, some entirely
All three of those SCPs are being rewritten as of this comment.
Honest opinion, Dr. Bright as a character should of been "retired" and had stipulations put on the character that they can't be used in any new SCP articles but the character of Dr. Bright themselves should not of been ret-coned out of existence no mater the Duckman's actions as vile as they are.
1.) Dr. Bright was not required to be ret-conned out of existence. This is a conscious choice most people made because they don't like Duckman and, furthermore, kind of don't like Bright as a character. It was never forced.
2.) The wiki very rarely creates rules that hinder creative production on the site, so I doubt that, in any sane reality, they'd outright disallow the use of any certain character. This is practically perpetuated by the readers nowadays regardless; most modern articles that attempt to include Bright tend to get downvoted into deletion because, surprise surprise, the character written by an unlikeable creep *is* an unlikeable creep.
@@trintavonI’m fine with that, but I feel this will be a wound that will bleed away the SCP community. If you add too many social stigmas to the site, it will scare away avid writers and artists.
@@LordDaretSeeing this and other past drama (to include a site history on the wiki that is literally ALL drama) DID scare me away from any attempt to become an official writer for the fandom and to stay on AO3.
@@nerysghemor5781 What's AO3?
@@Based_Gigachad_001 Archive of Our Own
I greatly thank you for this video as someone who enjoys the scp fandom but left it for a bit due to a lost of interest and a new hyperfixation, i didn't know the whole duckman thing had happened until just recently and was scared to look up information on it
I actually got into scp due to one i consider a freind on scratch who made scp content, i actually read some of the articles surrounding dr. Bright and was quite interested in bright(my favorite character at the time) after my 2nd fnaf phase (the one that stopped my 1st scp phase[i call it phase but it's more like hyperfixations]) i actually started really reading the wiki, re-reading tales, etc. I also consume quite the considerable amount of scp skits, animation memes, even the occasional series. And ended up off-hand hearing about the adminbright problem, i was curious but afraid to look it up for a bit.
Im glad i saw this and know the situation.
I've been reading the wiki for over a decade but I only pay attention to community news once a year, so these past couple years have been pretty wild.
Havent gotten halfway (will edit later once I do) but I was really shocked seeing this happen man.. my own scp researcher OC was kind of based off of him but very different concept wise. And ik people are kinda split between separating the art from the artist kinda argument, but we gotta remember:
Bright WAS AND STILL IS, a personification of the creator. A sona OC, if you may. Because of this, no matter how many good articles he had, or how much chunks of lore he had given to us via the character's involvement, i could see why they had to do this change- even if it may seem quite sudden, or poorly executed. Honestly, Bright doesnt even NEED to be wholly replaced via rewriting articles. Maybe he just adopts the Shaw name or smth- although it would be difficult to explain why. Either way, the frustration and confusion is somewhat understandable, but whats done is done.
Dr. Bright was made by a person who is based off of mostly that person, and ended up being a creep. So of course the character is going to be tainted somewhat, though even if we try to separate the character from the artist, it's never goibg away. But at the same time, a sudden renewal with sudden rewrites would also shake the balance, causing unrest for the community and splitting them even more.
For me, I am sad that it had to end this way, or that such an important lore heavy character would end up having a creator that's literally a creep ass. But hopefully things will get better though, just wishing for a better execution regarding this issue. (Like, why not just.. redact Bright's name, but keep Shaw's name mentioned in current articles and stuff?)
Anyways imma continue watching
I think your overestimating how much of a hand the og author had in the character Bright. Most of the articles and tales with the character weren’t written by the og author and those were the ones that had the most characterization for Bright. In fact most of the things the og author wrote with the character were very dull. Plus scp being the way it is means the characters and concepts belong to the community.
As for the og author I highly doubt he cared much for the character and only used him because he was popular and got the author a lot of attention. I believe the author would have done the same thing with any of their other oc’s had they become popular as well.
no, jack bright and his family are written by many different writers, the article "things Dr bright is not allowed to do" is created by the scumbag but the character is a community character. i feel deeply for the victims as some of my family members have gone through similar experiences but Dr Bright will never be Dr Shaw, he's been around too long and loved by too many on the site and off of it.
haven't really gone into SCP for a while, started to get back into it last week. Went through characters and tales I could remember (Bright, Gear, Clef related), start off from there then to the new stuff since I last visited when series 7 was brand new.
I just now heard about this and yeah, it sucks that this happened and Im glad adminbright is gone. at first I didn't think much of it since ive read hundreds of articles without ever reading the author and saw the SCP doctors without ever thinking of the people who made the characters (other than gears) for months or years and never thought of them as the same. Coming back to the site and seeing everyone calling for the character to be trashed and related tales to be deleted or replaced with Shaw, to me, that sucks even more. I really don't understand that notion.
I really don't like change, so unfortunately for me, it's never going to be Shaw, it's going to be Dr. Jack Bright. Unfortunate cause I wanted to go back for the tales and articles I liked and if a lot of them are going to be deleted or rewritten to character oblivion then it just threw me back out
The only thing that was deleted was the bright list. A fiew authors have chosen to replace Bright with Shaw, but 99% of works that featured Bright still uses the name Bright.
Oh simple! I assimilated him as a creation of mine, rewrote *EVERY SINGLE THING ABOUT HIM* and then... idk all i know is his amulet is "still" 963, but like- it works in a *completely different way*
Oh and elijah shaw AND bright coexist and _i swear to 343 sometimes they share _*_one braincell_*_ like holy shit-_
I always had the idea that the amulet one day evolves and turns the next body into Shaws original body, it sinks metal into the chest to do so. And Shaws name was bright, but only cause his older brother made him take the name of a fellow scientist who died in the 076-2 breach, who, looked just like Shaw.
The amulet would also, depending on how angry Shaw is, turns some of the skin on Shaw to silver, his eyes to ruby, and whatever is touched next turns to metal. Just adding more to the idea of body jumping, taking someone else’s name, and also having him and his family be a parallel to Able and Cains. Why? Mickel(idk how to spell it) found out that able would breach that day and sent his younger brother to die
Edit: wanna add that on occasion this can cause a breach and some deaths
@@cookierunhaven3608 so
I now have to remember about a random steel-type iteration of shaw from a random comment
Neat :)
@@RainbowGod666 sorry! I’m so so sorry!
@@cookierunhaven3608 no worriea man, i made screenshots :3
@@RainbowGod666 oh?
I rarely ever keep in touch with communities or fandoms, there’s only like 3 communities I will check in on tbh, so this is genuinely the first time I’ve heard of Dr Bright despite being into SCP for over 10 years now.
I’ve apparently missed a lot.
[Edit] Looking at the comments, it’s insane to me how insanely attached people are to the name/character. Separating the art from the artist/author doesn’t do much, sadly. You can’t really escape what the artist/author has done, no matter how much you try to change it.
I like this format and your approach to topics like those. Great and respectful video, will be happy to see more of those.
This sounds incredibly in-character for dr bright
all except the pedo stuff
I'm still no fan of replacing or deleting everything with Dr. Bright in it, no matter how Cimmerian or any commenter here tries to propose it. The art needs to be separated from the artist.
And also to me as a kind of outsider (I consume SCP content, but I'm not registered in the wiki) this whole fuzz seems more like a cover up, more like "Meh ... we don't want to be associated with that guy, so let's just delete his stuff so people hopefully forget and never ask about it again." than anything else.
You can throw around with all the arguments, all the reasons why, but I think this hit the nail on the head.
The admins of the side should just admit they were disgusted of that guys actions and are frustrated with themselves that they didn't find out sooner and then promise to have more eyes on sus creators from now on (and actually do it of course, not just say it). That's all the consequences that should come from this.
The deletion of articles because of this is pointless, cause you can't delete what happened. You can't delete the damage this creep did and you can't delete anyones mistakes. You need to life with it!
Except we haven't deleted nor replaced everything with Bright. Also, you say the it's just the admins, but if you actually paid attention to the wiki you'd realize that the admins held a *vote* which every single member of the wiki was allowed to vote in, and that's what resulted in its deletion. I'm actually curious why so many people like bright and the character's existence on the wiki at all; they are a creep, depressing, and tend to exist solely for silly gags with little substance behind their character. And *nobody* is trying to cover this up; the fact that so many people want to remove bright is *because* of how deeply ingrained the character is with the author. Its a self insert for god's sake.
Yeah i dont have a wikidot account (YET) so no fucking wonder "my" bright is so different
Also i have an headcanon that shaw and bright sometimes share one braincell
my answer: the universe rebooted and his and his families existence has been replaced with another
I’m living in denial of him being removed. One of my MAIN OCs {Rusty Bright} is literally Dr Bright’s son.
Change it to Rusty Shaw so it's not associated
Am I the only one who thinks that the inability of someone to separate the art from the artist is kind of their fucking problem?
Art is by definition a manifestation of the mind of the artist, there is no way to separate them
@@Pangloss6413yes there is, it’s called never knowing the artist. I was very aware of the character called Dr Bright, but I had never heard of some weirdo called… Duckman? All art is a manifestation of the mind, but just because Volkswagen was created by the Nazi’s does not mean we still associate it with them to this day. Other people took over and made changes.
Few of both new and old members were even aware bright was a self insert of a real person before this incident (and his real name isn’t even bright) so taking the more popular fictional character and treating them as one and the same and needing to be changed is just absurd. You’re pulling the same thing blizzard did with Mcree and just by changing the name you are forever tying the new name with the old anyways. Did anyone even think this through after seeing how that failed? It’s all a pointless attempt to avoida problem that wasn’t even a real problem and instead you’ve now created a Streisand effect. Shaw will never escape the connection to Dr Bright nor Adminbright now. The self created cognitohazard lives on rent free.
A few folk have been pushing to delete anything to do with Bright off the wiki. I will forward them your arguments encouraging their deletion.
@@DCimmerian I don't encourage deletion of content for petty reasons. They will do as they please though. They always have.
@@Anatarion99 Sexual harassment is a petty reason?
@@joshuasgameplays9850 When did the FICTIONAL character sexually harass you?
@@joshuasgameplays9850 It is a petty reason for deleting or removing Bright from hundreds of works, including some of the most popular works on the site.
I am fairly new to SCP, and I must say it is encouraging to see that this community is ready to stand against one of their most influential creators and remove one of its most popular characters to protect its members.
I really like Bright but we have to let him go. Or like what they are currently doing by renaming Bright to Shaw just like in Overwatch watch where McCree is changed to Cole Cassidy.
But a part of me still don't want to let go of Bright. Maybe hate the writer love the character kind of thing can work.
The "separate the art from the artist" idea has circled a few times in the community regarding Bright but it doesn't work for multiple reasons, the utmost being that Bright is practically written to *be* adminbright; the character in an unlikeable, depressed creep with little morality, and there is next-to-no reason to keep it around, especially since most on the on-site community has consensus hatred for him and downvotes nearly every new article he is in into deletion. Their time had passed long ago; we've got new characters with much more engaging characters and stories to keep an eye on now.
@@trintavon I'm not siding with him or trying to defend him or even disregarding the victims. It's just that Bright is one of the iconic scientists that introduced me to the scp world.
I'm just sad that Bright cant exist now because of the atrocities of his creator.
@@sinfulwrath666 I made no claim that you are siding with him -- your original comment was entirely respectful. It is unfortunate that a character beloved by the off-site character is being removed in such a way, but the on-site community has long grown tired of their existence. Luckily, there will always be more characters to latch on to.
Damn this drama makes me realize theres creeps everywhere
Welcome to the internet, have a look around...
@@trintavon real
Dr.Bright is no longer allowed.
IMO headcanon that doctor bright finally went too far and they either terminated him or locked him in a box as containment, probably getting into shit day to day and deteriorating.
things doctor bright is not allowed do: be on the scp wiki
I remember there was a tale Dr. Bright wrote called "Doctor Doctor Doctor" with some dubious content 💀
Uh well, I think it's actually stupid to replace a character because of the author, I extremely like Bright as a character and I can't actually hold the fact that he needs to be replaced. (Even if it isn't mentioned but yeah...).
I also say as a victim of SA in online and in rl that Duckman's behavior is disgusting, to tell you I can actually understand if someone jokes about the nudes or does a meme of it... But on the other side it's just sick. In any case I think that someone should continue Bright's articles...
Again, Bright is the best❤
Bright is too closely intertwined with the real guy. The character was pretty much instrumental to his attempts to groom ppl. It would be one thing if Bright was just some character he happened to make or a project he was involved in but the man and the character are effectively inextricable. You cannot talk about the man and what he did without talking about the character, and the reverse is often true.
No part of that belongs in SCP circles.
@@armorparadeI kind of understand where your coming from but on the other hand the creator has been gone for a long time and thousands of other people have put so much work and effort into the character of Bright and it’s a bit unfair that all of that should go to waste all because one person decided to write some messed up things with the character, which if you think about it anyone could write vile stuff with any character from any fandom does that mean that the character’s are ruined? Also the same goes for using characters/work for inappropriate benefits anyone could have used a character the same way the Brights creator did but that shouldn’t become the character’s fault if that makes sense?
@@Blake-xj9yj I'm more concerned about the people that Duckman hurt. I think it's more unfair to choose to preserve Bright over facing the reality.
Also, abusive, predatory people can and regularly do associate themselves with things like that. That's not what we're talking about right now. But in those cases, there is an understanding that the two are not interconnected. It is reasonable to believe that someone can eventually develop a healthier connection to that subject. It is not reasonable to expect people to look at new Bright fanwork and other activity and not see the roots.
@@Blake-xj9yjBut, as far as I know, they aren’t changing the character in any way. They’re just changing the name to something that does not have a connection to someone who has done awful things irl. I might be misunderstanding, but if all it is is a name change then it isn’t a very big problem. The character survives, albeit called something different.
@@armorparade I get that and I’m all for making sure people are informed about the character’s problematic history so they can decide if they’re comfortable with using Bright, but also not everyone is going to give up a character they love because some horrible person did something they had no control over and it shouldn’t be their responsibility to either. I just don’t want anyone to be harassed over whatever decision they come too because the whole situation was out of everyone’s control besides maybe the other admins. As for the victims I get wanting to make the community more comfortable for them but again it’s no one’s responsibility to do so and there’s almost always a block feature for those who want to avoid certain content outside of the wiki. As always it’s up to the individual to curate their online experience to a certain degree.
See, I started making a game awhile back that was going to center of playing as Bright, but to flesh it out last year I started converting it over to a book. A sorta choose your own ending that changes what's going on on the site as you make choices in the story. And went back and made a note in the attributation after mentioning the amulet's info, that I'd be going with the Dr. Shaw version of the character because like you, it just doesn't feel right to keep using the name after what the author has done. Do you know if there's any offical move to change the name in the original document?
Unlikely. Most changes have been made by the authors of their respective pieces and, unless the admins host a community vote, I doubt they'll forcefully change articles otherwise.
@@trintavon valid point. But they have over ruled the vote and the author before. Like when the one author wanted all their articles wiped. But you're most likely right.
I am honestly sad that I never got to read the list,but I’m happy 963 hasn’t been deleted.
The list is on CZcams if you search it up
Well, I had heard jokes around the internet before about some SCP readers not being able to tell what’s real or fake… Guess they were right if they think an immortal weirdo with a magic amulet and a chainsaw is in any way an existing person, let alone responsible for real life crimes. How many times do people need to be reminded putting the blame on fiction takes that blame off of the person?
it's not that. it's that both have the same name and the fictional one was made by the real one. it is understandeable why people would feel iffy about it
I can see why some people physically can’t because they were victims, but for most people, it should be fairly easy to separate the two as a fictional character and a real person separate things
I respect the decisions and support some of the actions but Dr Bright as a character shouldn’t be erased he was unique and great and due to how SCP works it makes fixing these issues patching up new frameworks etc a lot easier then a 100% fully grounded character
I am sorry to all the victims of that creep but hopefully a middle ground can be reached somewhere between Bright becoming a Voldemort where you can’t say his name and defacing what actually happened surely there’s a way to acknowledge the bad but work with the good because by removing the character it could damage the community as a whole
It's really interesting to me that most of the comments here are in favor of separating Dr. Bright the character from Dr. Bright the person, whereas the subreddit and the onside community seem to be generally more supportive of the Shawfication and the deletion of the list, do you have any theories as to why that might be?
I can’t really say much about the subreddit since I don’t use Reddit but Dr Bright and the other staff characters have always been more popular off site. The list was also pretty hated on site for a long time, with the staff characters including Bright kinda being dead for a long while on-site with no one really using them in new articles or tales.
I think it's because Reddit has a better comment organizer than YT, which doesn't have a better system for organizing comments.
This leads to unpopular comments on YT with near zero likes being placed in between the top comments which can skew what the majority opinion actually looks like. This doesn't happen on Reddit because of the more advanced sorting system.
The art will always outlive the artist
I mean the human did stuff wrong. Dont have to punish the fictional entity. Its not a human. It cant do wrong.
problem is the name and the fact it was made by the same person
"Hey bright, i hear you like em young" 💀
Given time his replacement Elias Shaw could be just as popular as Dr Bright was
I bet barely anyone knows that dr bright was based off an account owned by a real person.
This is what’s confusing me the most. Do these people genuinely think a real immortal weirdo with a chainsaw was writing internet sci-fi horror???
all of this is very sad but I still consider Jack bright and his family as canon and will continue to use the moniker.
should have just destroyed the amulet and let dr bright RIP. That OC is one of the founding pillars of the SCP foundation and removing him is like chopping off a leg. anyone who try's to say "look at what the creator did" should understand what death of the author means and use it.
The death of the author argument has reared its head in this discussion a million times but its a lot less effective when the character is not only morally problematic itself, but also is a self-insert that almost directly mirrors the author's own characters. Also, if Bright hardly exists as a "leg" for the foundation. He is maybe a splinter. Ridding the wiki of him does next to nothing to harm the wiki itself.
@@trintavon I completely disagree with what you said. It is unnecessary to identify the originator, or worse, it might be included within the explanation for why Dr. Bright was killed off. Dr. Bright is one of the pillars because, when asked about scp, individuals invariably list a list that includes Bright. He is an iconic character and a key piece of the verse's narrative, therefore removing him will hurt the scp.
I also detest the scp wiki's moral pretentiousness. Before he did this crap, we all knew he was this fucked little dude, but we disregarded it due to his OC shit, as we always do with talented authors. I frequently observe similar shit in the SCPverse, where well-known people are overlooked for the fucked shit they do just to later be outed and have their content removed, even though it is now in the public domain and no longer belongs to them.
New rule: the author of dr bright isn’t allowed near SCP-053 SCP-191 Ect.
If the SCP is a non-Canon series with infinite universes in and everyone has their head canon I mean I have a treasure hunter who found the Medallion in a pyramid and got killed while wearing it by a Security guard at a museum she was trying to steal a gem that would have given them the ability to teleport.
The Bright list was amazing! For some reason, a lot of times, talent and corruption/mental illness/shitperson goes together. R. Kelley for example.
Changing the character to Shaw makes a lot of sense and I think is the right call. That being said I do really miss the List, I feel like its a great showing of the comedic side of the SCP verse. (Also could we really not think of a cooler name than Shaw?)
I don't even like that we're simply name-swapping the character when it'd be much better to completely redo them, but that aside Elias Shaw is up there in good names. That all said, the List was full of messed up jokes that indicated adminbright's true nature and the list was deleted by community vote, not forced.
I disagree with you and further more I think everyone who agrees with changing Dr. Bright's name are people who have no ability to separate art from the artist, true bright was a self insert but still, censoring things because they have connections to problematic people is such a fucking backwards behavior that modern civilized people should not be partaking in as it is censoring of history
TL:DR I disagree because censorship is bad and inherently against the ideals of free speech
Im unsure about is but i heard the person who bought up the dr shaw replacement idea is also a bad person and people said hes only doing this for popularity so i have seen people refuse to use either
Im so confused rn
One of the creators of Shaw might be a bad person but the other is genuinely nice and should be considered the main creator of Shaw since they’re basically doing all the work for them, you can find them in the description of this video.
I believe it was djkaktus who suggested the name change. Personally I'd prefer we remove the character entirely as opposed to "replace-all"-ing the name, as that feels like a lazy and non-meaningful change, but to my knowledge kaktus is far from a bad person.
@@trintavonit's kinda hard to remove a character so attached to the lore tho
Idk if this is unpopular opinion but I enjoyed those lore :(
...and I refuse to use the Dr. Shaw replacement because Shaw is a boring name. No offense to anyone named Shaw, but the only reason I would ever use that name for a character I was going to write is if it turns their initials into a neat acronym. (I once used it in one of my character's last names so that her full initials were L.N.A.S.A.)
@@trintavonhonestly if he was to be removed, I think a classic Ethic committee move would be to black bar the name Bright from all official records. It would be an odd, but very SCP thing to do.
Bro why can’t we have nice things, first lord bung becomes a pos and now bright?
I feel like the non sexual and inappropriate parts of the bright list should be attributed to Shaw
Dr. Bright is no longer allowed within 100 meters of a school.
time to put DR miller as the new best dr in the community, we all know he is, and should have been before anyway
I am glad I don't delve into fandoms... It seems like something like this happens at least once in anything.
I never got into the character's story aside from him being able to essentially live forever through the use of the medallion.
"Despite Doctor Bright's belief to the contrary, the bird is, in fact, _not_ the word."
Birds are fake.
I got so much shit for calling out this guy, but I'm not a talking head so no one cared until now.
I think the decission to replace him was definetly a good idea, altough sad that it all happened in the first place
On its face, 'using authority to coerce sexual behaviours' is what's objectionable. The fact that the site feels a need to put a 'common decency policy' in place indicates that Bright is unlikely to be the only problem character who held or is holding power. Which frankly makes a lot of sense.
It's pretty common for parasocial decay and intrasocial decadence to take hold of user-created communities on the internet. While there's been a few issues over the years, I'm honestly surprised it's taken this long to have a big one.
"Parasocial decay and intrasocial decadence"
Really flexing that Jordan Peterson University English degree, aren't ya?
@Pangloss6413 go listen to a vtuber or pay any attention to recent games titles. Persons twelve years old are learning these words, catch up with the class.
So Dr. Bright and Dr. Shaw now exist at the same time, with some articles calling him Bright, other Shaw. In addition i guess the family lf doctor Bright (wasnt his father a 05) will propanly also be deleted i guess. Thats gonna confuse so many people, who arent extremly involved in the Wiki and only watch some scp videos and read articles.
The wiki does not exist to solely appease the off-site community; many wiki members have been wanting Bright as a character gone for some time now and practically ignore their existence regardless. It also helps that there is no set "canon" for the wiki; maybe Bright's father was an O5 in a story -- this likely isn't the case for 99% of stories on the wiki. In fact, outside of articles directly including Bright and his family, these changes effect next to nothing, and those that are changing are changing because the *authors* of those pieces *chose* to change it. Not everything revolves around the comfort of off-site.
@@trintavon if they could get a consensus, that bright is changed to Shaw in every mention thats fine. But now its just some do, some dont. Wich will propably confuse newcomers, and people that only read the wiki articles. Hell i had to see these videos, to even notice it, because i didnt see anything on the wiki about this, while reading articles. Some only noticed because Bright was replaced with Shaw. Others propably still havent noticed, even if they are on the wiki daily. So unless you are deeper involved than just enjoying the articles, you propably havent noticed it yet. Maybe they will go through and just switch every mention of Bright with Shaw, so the confusion between the two of them stops.
god damn scp is not doing well dr. bright and confinement in one year
Give it a year or two, I’m sure the scp foundation will get better
@@Alphaterm1457 Yeah
...I guess the desire camera is correct...Dr.Jack Bright resting at last...
This reminds me of the Rurouni Kenshin ordeal, love the story, hated the person/author
This explanation is much better and concise than your first ones. Thanks!
they just should turned the Dr. Bright char into a Jester, like most people see him, just remove the Cancer that the creator is
As far as I've seen with the character Dr. Bright, he's *far* evolved passed his pedo creator's creation, he's his own being now and one of the fundamental glues too the fanbase; Dr. Bright's creator, screw him, let em rout. . but keeping Dr. Bright the character may and/or might help the pedo's victims recover, like say Dr. Bright the character formally apologizing too the young kids on the wiki for his creator's horrendous behavior and maybe help them work through the trauma of it.
I honestly don't know what ta say about all this, my mind's gone completely blank and silent at this news and I'm struggling to figure out what ta make of all this. I hope the pedo's victims can now rest easy knowing he's booted out of the wiki; and I also hope that this won't be the end of Dr. Bright the character for several reasons.
Agreed I already have an idea on how things could go canonically,
We know Dr. Bright HATED being immortal, that being what made him go insane. He can never die.
So just imagine, one day he gets himself to one of the reality warping SCPS, asks it to make it so he NEVER touched SCP 963, but it takes it literally and just changes his name and makes it so anyone who utters his name DIE. Or die and have memory loss of his name if they survive due to an anomaly *if they can't die either*.
Then we could have another entry to what he's not allowed to do "Dr. Shaw is not allowed to reenact beetlejuice with his original name".
It would be SO fitting of his character.
Then just redact his original name or replace it with his new one, add in him going by random names with every new body "Just call me Dr. Strangelove!"
@@electrobob992 Um, I will admit I don't want to get rid of the character Dr. Bright. Like many in the replies here alone have pointed out, getting rid of Bright runs the inevitable outcome or erasing who knows how much established lore for countless SCPs; so I can imagen the admins of the wiki are facing with this situation --> "Completely erase Dr. Bright from our wiki's history and potentially mortally wound the fanbase due too over ten years worth of lore being suddenly gone and having to quickly figure out a solution too Thanos snapping one of the community's favorite chaotic neutral characters and potentially loosing a lot of its fans and yadi yadi yada. . or keep the character Dr. Bright in the community and try our hardest too erase all traces of him being the author-insert of a pedophile and potentially live the consequences of having many kids unsettled by the fact that the character they loved so much who've been used too coerce them into doing sexual acts they wouldn't otherwise do still being around." . Basically, the way I see it now that my brain's back up-n-running is either kill off the entire community due too how engrained Dr. Bright is too the SCP brand or never actually 100% closing that nightmare; that's why I said in my comment the character Dr. Bright should go too the pedo's victims and formally apologize too them for his creator's horrible actions, it's the best middle ground that I can see with this situation.
Hmm while I don’t think having character Bright apologize to the victims would do much I think erasing the original creators work would. If character Bright had solely been written by the creator then I would push more for total erasure but thousands of people put years of work into the character on the wiki and other sites so taking that away from them all because one person did something bad with the character just doesn’t seem fair. With all that work for the character done by other people the original creators stuff isn’t even needed, most of the tales for character Bright on the wiki weren’t even made by his original creator. These tales even have the background for character Bright and they’re written much better then the creator’s. Getting rid of the creators work would bring closure to their victims and keep them from gaining anymore through the wiki as well as get rid of the disgusting stuff the creator wrote for character Bright allowing the character to live on instead through the kinder works written for him by others without being tied down by his creators actions and works containing him. Character Bright has already been detached from his creator for years this would just be the final step to completely sever the ties.
@@Blake-xj9yjWhat about scp-321, 963, and 590? I would say they are important to dr Bright and the bright familys lore. I honestly think it is stupid to delete stuff based on who has written it, regardless if that persone is a good or bad persone, and regardless of what type of characters they choose to write about. It is one thing if they only write to defend their sick ideas, for example if every single character that Admin Bright wrote defended his real life behavior, but at that point the work would suck regardless, because it would have been unrealistic. Admin bright didn't do that, except maybe with Jack Bright at times, but I don't think those works should be deleted simply because he wrote Jack Bright to be that way. After all, it is realistic that some people behave that way.
Not been a good year for the SCP community.
“I was there to witness the victim of a sickness”🎵🎵🎵
ON DR SHAW if your a bright fan and expect dr shaw to be nothing more then a name change hold your horse and don't get your hopes up.
They guy that made shaw is changing the character from a chaotic made scientist who struggles to keep to his humanity to a goody two shoes who makes massive fuck ups. From what I can tell from quotes I have seen that allegedly the author made. Now this may be an enjoyable character sure but if your going to be looking for the "chaotic made scientist who struggles to keep to his humanity" Prepare for a nerf and a different character.
Ps I did see this on shaws off SCP wiki page and the quotes have been removed since then so this could all be false however I have not heard anything against this so I could be mislead but I have a strong feeling that its going to be the case unless the community just keeps writing him like old bright.
Yeah no fucking wonder my interpretation (more like my own character cause that is how fucking separated he is from the original) is so different and more on the "dude is 100+ and young, did a bit of everything, and now hes chill"
@@RainbowGod666 Yea the problem with DR shaw is that it does not really make sense for him not really to be chaotic. Because as time goes on the more and more his mind is suppose to deteriorate because he either watches everyone he cares about slowly die around him over and over again until people just start dying even more quickly never mind the containment breaches. Or never make a singular friend every again. Why on earth is he gonna give a shit about anyone he dont care about. after all to him they will just die later him not sooner and no one can kill him over anything. And even if they could he would want that.
DR shaw as he is does not make sense as a character. Yea he does not have to be evil per say neither was DR bright but being ethical when his own brother was lobotomize by the same organisation that now wants him to behave and his immortal not gonna go well.
@@steveripethefustercluck. i was talking about bright but yeah correct
Dr shaw? Hes just a little fella, slightly younger than bright, and hes besically the embodiment of 🥺👉👈
Most of the foundation (SCPs included) are willing to protect shaw like the tf2 pyro protects his teammates like a mother
Pretty sure hes also the only "normal" senior in the foundation (not like thats a hard thing to be like holy shit you get to level 5 you become quirkier than a MHA main charachter) (see what i did there?)
@@RainbowGod666 I am sorry WHAT wdy mean people are willing to protect him not only does that sound stupide is fucking immortal aint no way people are protecting a guy that cant die.
I'm begging to get annoyed of how many times I see people turning out to be pedos or creeps. Why are so many popular figures mest up.
Something to do with how creativity and mental illness are tied together. Art paints the view of the world from the lenses of an artist.
Maybe it has something to do with our fascination in the morbid that we flock to people who are different that can create things we could never possibly imagine on our own.
Thank you, ill be linking a few folks to this video. I think this is the thing people need to have beaten into their heads when they want to talk about "death of the auhtor."
This is someone's self insert OC. The art is the author. People can try to square that any way they want personally, but they cant complain the removal is happening because we all need to "separate art from the artist."
Dr. Bright is a self portrait of an obnoxious, predatory person and doesnt loose a thing by ascribing the good stories he is featured in to another character's name.
I’d just like to add a gentle reminder here to not harass people who still use Bright or people who chose to use Shaw/another rewrite at the end of the day no one is responsible for the actions of others and it’s up to the individual to decide what their comfortable with.
(Me who forcefully separated my self insert OC from myself so that the actual self insert would be literally me and the OC would be my "avatar")
Well this is kinda awkward ngl
@@Blake-xj9yj hundred percent agree. The fact that folk are doing it voluntarily but also not putting up something like, say, a site-wide ban is a net benefit.
It let's people who are aware/invested make their own choices for their work, and doesn't alienate or bully authors and visitors who aren't in the loop.
I’m pretty sure the admin wasn’t out there with chainsaws and all the other bizarre stuff. 😅
Out of curiosity do you know what’s going to happen to story’s featuring members of doctor brights family? I remember there being a lot of lore about them, and if the character is renamed is the family now just going to be referred to by the same name?
Ugh SCP mod drama again.
If were replacing dr bright with dr shaw, then we need a things dr shaw isn't allowed to do at the foundation list.
What did Bright do this time?!
Literally SMDH. This is why we can't have nice things...seriously.
I assume another reason why any mention of his character is being scrubbed is also for the victims' sake? So that they will never have to see or hear abput this character ever again?
That seems to be a thing some of the people who want to keep his character around forget about: his victims. Imagine if you were coerced into a shameful position by someone famous and then even when all of their misdeeds are brought to light you see that person's "face" being plastered around as a cutie patootie or in fanfiction as some funny haha pervert.
I mean, I’d assume victims would already be getting help for their trauma, but certainly so if they can’t tell a real abuser from a fictional meme man…
So the list was accurate, and the IT logs were true.
Good overview. Part of me would want this video posted on the site in place of where the list was so people who were unaware could be informed of the situation.
I went to the list page for the first time after it was deleted. I already knew what had happened, but it struck me as odd/annoying/stupid that the "explanation" they have there doesn't actually tell you what happened.
I think it would've been best to kill off the character. Lock the 963 article, and let it go. A community is constantly changing, let it speak as it does.
Mr.G: his soul tasted lick sauerkraut :(
SS: womp womp being capable of eating souls.