I attempt to tear the wiki asunder except i'm just stealing some guys meme and this has spiralled radically out of control please help

[The_2nd_Existential_Seed]

Really ? Doesn't majority rule outweigh the power of a Content Mod ?

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Azzy and Matt are the deciding factors in High 1-B upgrades, if they dont agree, its not happening

 

[The_2nd_Existential_Seed]

That's unfair. The most most likely to downgraded this... Are the deciding factors in this upgrades. I have no words how one-sided that is.

 

[Kepekley23]

Democracy > everything else. Saying otherwise is North-Korea levels of elitism.

...HOWEVER, if the arguments have been debunked, going with the majority becomes an appeal to popularity.

Azzy made a valid point even I was trying to bring up ages go: should we really take this as canon?

 

[WeeklyBattles]

@Kep Yes, Azzy and i are going to go through everything on th wiki at some point to differentiate the canons and reorganize some things but there's really no reason to assume this is a different canon

 

[Kepekley23]

I know this is canon. But does it override other canons? That's my point.

I don't know if I should address Azzy's counterargument or not.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Nothing is overriding anything, If anything its consistent with Nobody's statement of an uncountable number of dimensions in uncountable space

Go for it

 

[MasterOfArda]

Democracy > everything else. Saying otherwise is North-Korea levels of elitism.

That is ad hominem. Plus, a staff with experiance in the verse would naturally have their voice count more than a user who has never read SCP (Like, for example, me).

 

[Kepekley23]

That is ad hominem. Plus, a staff with experiance in the verse would naturally have their voice count more than a user who has never read SCP (Like, for example, me).

Don't take me out of context, please.

 

[MasterOfArda]

I did read the rest of your comment:

"...HOWEVER, if the arguments have been debunked, going with the majority becomes an appeal to popularity.

Azzy made a valid point even I was trying to bring up ages go: should we really take this as canon?"

My point was, if no argument has been soundly debunked, appealing to democracy can get ridicolous.

Say this scenario:

Niether arguement was debunked, so we use strict democracy to figure out the answer.

On one side there is a bunch of people who know nothing about the verse, on the other is a bunch of staff who know the verse very well. Say the first group has one more member. If we accept the first group as correct that is simply ridicolous.

Want to discuss this on your or my wall?

 

[Kepekley23]

Your scenario is an ad verecundiam. Sorry. Knowing the verse very well doesn't matter if you can't debunk the opponent's arguments, and more people agree with him/her.

This should be taken to a wall at best.

 

[Ryukama]

Of course no one person is worth more than the other, and one person especially shouldn't be worth more than multiple people combined. However if one person holds a valid idea and 5 people are holding a nonsensical idea, the valid idea is worth more than the nonsensical one. On issues that aren't so black and white we should go with majority vote, but if an idea has been thoroughly debunked we shouldn't go with it just because a bunch of people agree with it.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I don't think High 1-B has been accepted.

 

[Kepekley23]

Ryukama is objective and correct, as always.

 

[Kepekley23]

@Matt.

It hasn't, primarily due to "canon" issues, and also the "is it scientifical, is it a blind hypothesis" thing.

 

[SITHISIT]

"1-B, Possibly High 1-B" is what most of us agreed on IIRC. They seem to be taking it as we want to make everyone solid High 1-B. (which we figured HEG, Almighty, 3812 and Swann would get only)

It just means we can solidly confirm they are 1-B, however there is some evidence they are High 1-B but that evidence is very rocky..

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

I agree with Matt here. You guys are way too fast on this. At least wait for three or four stories that actually showcases this. Is like trying to upgrade a whole verse with just one single solitary statement. While in this particular case is cut-and-dry, is it really any consistent? That's my opinion on this.

Still my opinion on this subject.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

@Lephyr Yes, its consistent

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

How many stories and/or SCP (aside from 3812) mentions infinite dimensions?

 

[SITHISIT]

i dont know, there's 2786, very meta and big and powerful. who knows

 

[Antvasima]

Well, from what I remember, I thought that Azathoth made the most sense here, as usual, but am still waiting for him to create his other SCP revision thread.

I also agree with Ryukama about that the most sensible and well-informed argument should hold precedence, and in addition, the staff have to hold final say regarding evaluations, while being as unbiased and fairminded as they can, or we would fall quickly towards chaos/anarchy.

 

[Aeyu]

I frankly think that there should be a staff-only discussion about this, as this has so far gone nowhere in either direction.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

@Ant He's not making another thread for a while as far as im aware, me and him are going to be discuss and sort some things out before he does

 

[SITHISIT]

SO what's the verdict?

Upgrade or no? Let's just decide if now.

 

[Antvasima]

@Aeyu

Given how long this thread is, it might be preferable to restart it while summarising the most important points in the beginning, in any case.

@WeeklyBattles

Okay. That is probably for the best.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

At this point what Ant suggested may be a good idea guys

 

[Holyhotsauce]

Is 1-B, Possibly High 1-B happening or not? I need a definite answer.

 

[Antvasima]

Probably not, going by Azathoth's analysis.

 

[Antvasima]

It also seems very unreliable to scale between different SCP characters, as we currently do, based on his other analysis regarding that there is limited continuity between them.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

@Ant Actually we kinda rolled back that rule quite some time ago, plus this isnt scaling between SCPs, this is just a basis for the scale of the multiverse

 

[Antvasima]

So there is no scaling between them anymore?

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Oh no, there IS scaling between them, the rule before is that we dont scale between them

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I agreed with Azathoth's reasoning that it seems very unreliable to do so.

 

[Antvasima]

But it is best to wait for him to start his new revision thread before those changes are performed.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Hmm? Everything they are scaled from at the moment comes from canon material, including scaling to each other. Ive done a LOT to make sure it does so the verse doesnt fall into complete chaos, including keeping tabs for different canons seperate and not lumping them all together

 

[Antvasima]

Well, you and Azathoth will have to work out a functional solution between yourselves then.

 

[Hl3_or_bust]

So, from what i can tell, the current issue is that azzy doesn't agree with anything, and bascially everyone else is good with atleast "1-B, possibly high 1-B", with a decent argument for high 1-B for swann, almighty, HEG, 3812 and maybe this new guy, judging on how some guys in the general discusion thread seem to think that he's an instance of swann or an aspect of him.

 

[Sir_Ovens]

An aspect of Swann is not necessarily as powerful as the original. That's like saying an avatar of The One Above All is also tier 0 for being an avatar of a tier 0.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, it is probably best to wait for Azathoth and Weekly to come up with a solution between themselves, and then create one or two new threads for it, as this one is overly long. Given that the discussion will be postponed, I will close this thread in the meantime.