• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

The Backrooms shouldn't be allowed. (STAFF ONLY)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Saikou_The_Lewd_King said:
Also yeah no offense but "wah SCP is high tier because of Vs Debaters" is an utterly terrible argument with no actual proof behind it. SCP is not only a gigantic verse but it's also a big nerd verse that focuses on weird esoteric concepts a lot, especially lately. I'd say it getting big tier shit eventually was inevitable, regardless of whatever Vs Debater conspiracy you guys believe in.
Click to expand...
A lot of high-tier stuff for SCP also existed long before the verse was even formally evaluated in the vs debating community

(Sorry, wasnt sure if i was allowed to post her or not)
 
Antvasima said:
I agree with this. Allowing fan-created verses with incoherent patchwork continuities without true storytelling, that have likely directly been customised to get as high tiers as possible by people who are members both in our wiki and the origin sites themselves, given the constant gradual increase in the SCP tiers over the years, seems very unwise to say the least.

We are currently spammed with tier 0 and High 1-A SCP pages for example.
Click to expand...
Absolutely no offense intended to you or anyone else here, Ant, but I feel discussing the specifics of whether SCP should or should not be allowed is fairly counterproductive to this thread's purpose, and should be left as a topic for a separate discussion, given how it is very much its own, immensely more controversial, can of worms. So by extension, you shouldn't be making indirect attacks at SCP in response to a post asserting exactly that.

All-in-all, I agree with Mori on that front: Keep SCP as an "Exception, not the rule" thing, by virtue of the circumstances that are specific to it (Which I believe have already been sufficiently outlined above), and brush off Backrooms-based wiki fiction to the side, for now. I believe that's what this thread was about from the start, no?
 
Last edited:
The only thing that all of these backrooms verses have in common is level 0. That's it, and everything else branches out and never intersects ever again.
 
On the topic of Backrooms content on Wikidot, 19 users (11 staff) are against it being allowed on the wiki in its current state, while 9 users (7 staff) are for it being allowed in its current state.

On the topic of non-wikifiction Backrooms content, 7 users (4 staff) seem to be against it being allowed on the wiki, while 21 users (14 staff) seem to be for it being allowed on the wiki.

Is that enough of a consensus, or should we wait for more comments?
 
Last edited:
Yes. Non collaborative projects. Like the YouTube series Kane Pixels.
 
This thread wasn't really meant to be about things like Kanes (as I didn't know they exist), tbh.

We seem to agree that collaborative/wikifiction Backrooms are good to throw out, though. SCP is a completely different matter, and this thread isn't remotely proposing the deletion of it in any way whatsoever.
 
Moritzva said:
This thread wasn't really meant to be about things like Kanes (as I didn't know they exist), tbh.

We seem to agree that collaborative/wikifiction Backrooms are good to throw out, though.
Click to expand...
To be honest, I'm kinda lost about what's suppose to happen or what were we talking about.

Yes, but only for now.
 
Greatsage13th said:
Yes, but only for now.
Click to expand...
10 users (8 staff) were against wikifiction backrooms ever being allowed, and 18 users (10 staff) were open to it being allowed some day.
 
Last edited:
Agnaa said:
10 users (8 staff) were against wikifiction backrooms ever being allowed, and 15 users (7 staff) were open to it being allowed some day.
Click to expand...
That's the point. The same thing happened to Wukong yet his profile came back here after more than 2 years afaik.
 
I mean, obviously rulings can change, that was never really in contention. Matter is, we'll give it time and see how things shape out before allowing them.
 
Agnaa said:
10 users (8 staff) were against wikifiction backrooms ever being allowed, and 15 users (7 staff) were open to it being allowed some day.
Click to expand...
Frankly, is there much difference between the two options? The indefinite ban can always be challenged, and that ends up being the equivalent of "allowing the verse some day".
 
I was counting "allow"s and different known conditions that those users think would cause the Backrooms to be allowed.

None of this stuff about "wikifiction contamination" could change, but if Liminal Archives was the only Backrooms thing that people cared about, I (and a few others) would be okay with it being on the wiki.

I think it's relevant whether our opinion has to change, or whether the site has to change a modest, known amount.
 
Seems the case is close to being resolved. However, it would be better to discuss what makes collaborative fiction an actual exception of a rule. Because “we’ll wait and see” is fine in theory, but we still need to know what criteria we need to look at.

Main comparison is SCP verse, which is obvious enough. So, it’d be best to give a list of things explaining why SCP is allowed. Like strict rules and moderation, etc.
Alternatively, since it appears a lot of people aren’t even sure about SCP, we can close this thread for a time being to discuss SCP in another one, and what makes it an exception.
I just want a proper closure, whether we allowing something, not, why, and for how long.
 
Meh, collaborative fiction getting thrown out is kinda wonky given two of the biggest collaborative fiction verses are also the biggest verses within the wiki (Marvel and DC Comics respectively), and except a point as arbitrary as "getting published" both verses aren't much different from the one being discussed.

If the verse is significant enough, supporters can just band together and create a canon guideline, it's what we do for SCP, Marvel and DC, I don't see why we can't just do that for Backrooms given the supporter base is notable enough to garner consensus from.

It's not really an exception when 3 verses already do it, you can make the argument of it being "too much work", but if people are willing to do it there shouldn't be a problem
 
The_Impress said:
Meh, collaborative fiction getting thrown out is kinda wonky given two of the biggest collaborative fiction verses are also the biggest verses within the wiki (Marvel and DC Comics respectively), and except a point as arbitrary as "getting published" both verses aren't much different from the one being discussed.

If the verse is significant enough, supporters can just band together and create a canon guideline, it's what we do for SCP, Marvel and DC, I don't see why we can't just do that for Backrooms given the supporter base is notable enough to garner consensus from.

It's not really an exception when 3 verses already do it, you can make the argument of it being "too much work", but if people are willing to do it there shouldn't be a problem
Click to expand...
I... actually didn't thought of that before.
 
We're not comparing The Backrooms to Marvel, that's stupid.
 
Why? Except notability I guess, the scenario is the same, and what I am saying is, in the scenario Backrooms IS notable enough, it's very well listable though what we do for Marvel.

I'm just giving out the general collab fiction metric here.
 
The_Impress said:
Why? Except notability I guess, the scenario is the same, and what I am saying is, in the scenario Backrooms IS notable enough, it's very well listable though what we do for Marvel.

I'm just giving out the general collab fiction metric here.
Click to expand...
There are verses less notable than the Backrooms on the wiki. The Backrooms isn't getting deleted because of its notability.

One distinction between the Backrooms and Marvel/DC is that the latter have publishers and editors to review it before it goes out, while the former doesn't. It gets put out there, and if it's exceptionally bad it gets removed. Another is that the writers for Marvel/DC are deliberately hired, while the ones for the Backrooms just hop onto the website, pass the scrutinizing process, and post their stories.

For me, the important difference is that there's many competing sources of Backroom canon. And since the original author isn't known, it's unclear which of these should take precedence, and which should be considered fanfiction. For SCP that's easy; the scp-wiki (and anything else it chooses to affiliate itself with) is canon, and works outside of it (including games) are fan-content.
 
Last edited:
Agnaa said:
There are verses less notable than the Backrooms on the wiki. The Backrooms isn't getting deleted because of its notability.

One distinction between the Backrooms and Marvel/DC is that the latter have publishers and editors to review it before it goes out, while the former doesn't. It gets put out there, and if it's exceptionally bad it gets removed. Another is that the writers for Marvel/DC are deliberately hired, while the ones for the Backrooms just hop onto the website, pass the scrutinizing process, and post their stories.
Click to expand...
Let me adjust 2 things.

"It gets put out there, if it does not fit from the lore's perspective at all it gets removed"

"The ones for the backrooms just hop onto the website, pass the scrutinizing process, and post their entities, levels or tales"
 
I could give about a dozen reasons why comparing The Backrooms to Marvel is ridiculous, but I'll start with this.

Let's take your premise that Marvel is essentially indistinguishable from SCP in terms of how we should treat it on the wiki, which is already a very flawed argument. This thread proposes that SCP is fine for the reasons that it is currently allowed, including how difficult it is to get content in SCP and how high the standards are. Now, I don't know how difficult it is to get hired as a write for Marvel, but I have a feeling the processes are a wee bit more tough than anything SCP has.

Bringing up Marvel has literally no point whatsoever on this thread when the OP that I wrote clearly spells out what the guidelines have been and should be, of which Marvel is so far away from you'd need a spyglass to even see the boundary. Please, stay on-topic, this is getting ridiculous.
 
Greatsage13th said:
Mmm...you seem awfully serious about this minor comparison.
Click to expand...
People have attempted to go greatly off-topic on this thread for a copious amount of time, made only more annoying by how much of a generally forgone conclusion the thread is. The overwhelming majority agree that The Backrooms should go, sans definitively self-contained works (as defined in previous posts) that otherwise follow our rules. If nobody has a reason to keep this thread open, I'll probably close it when I wake up.
 
Moritzva said:
People have attempted to go greatly off-topic on this thread for a copious amount of time, made only more annoying by how much of a generally forgone conclusion the thread is. The overwhelming majority agree that The Backrooms should go, sans definitively self-contained works (as defined in previous posts) that otherwise follow our rules. If nobody has a reason to keep this thread open, I'll probably close it when I wake up.
Click to expand...
There's not a better time to close it than the present is there?
 
I am in agreement with the Impress on this.

But in any case, I am in favour of allowing this verse. As someone else pointed out earlier, we need to just pick one and stick to it. As long as it has canon, it should be alright.
 
So has Mortizva received sufficient agreements for us to create a general rule about SCP being an exception, but that we otherwise do not allow easily cross-contaminated fan-created wiki content, especially if it does not originate in actual stories, just in fact sheets?
 
Antvasima said:
So has Mortizva received sufficient agreements for us to create a general rule about SCP being an exception, but that we otherwise do not allow easily cross-contaminated fan-created wiki content, especially if it does not originate in actual stories, just in fact sheets?
Click to expand...
Cross-contaminated?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Sans2345
Question about Backrooms
Replies
1
Views
586
KingNanaya
KingNanaya
Shiedaisthepeak
The Master Off All Rooms...KEYMASTER!
Replies
13
Views
609
Mr. Bambu
Mr. Bambu
Sans2345
Should we really allow Backrooms ARGs? (Like Kane Pixels for example)
Replies
7
Views
2K
Iiliminal
Iiliminal
Sans2345
The Backrooms General Discussion Thread
Replies
15
Views
2K
Greatsage13th
Greatsage13th
H3110l12345I20
Gacha Life in the Backrooms (Marsh vs Bacteria (Kane Pixels))
Replies
0
Views
609
H3110l12345I20
H3110l12345I20
Back
Top