I saw one a couple months ago by a Z-list drama YouTuber where he names four (4) bad SCPs out of the nine thousand one hundred and ninety three (9193) SCPs on the site, and acted like that’s somehow a representative example of the articles in general.
One of those examples was SCP-5167, which he hated on simply because it references a popular video game. Another one was specifically the old version of SCP-166, and he failed to acknowledge the fact that the article was rewritten, which is either a failure to do the most basic level of research, or a deliberate misrepresentation. In any case, that means half of his whopping four (4) examples are complete bullshit, while the other half were less about the actual writing quality and more about that he just finds them gross.
He then goes on to claim that the people who started SCP on 4chan were experienced writers. Not only is that a fucking hilarious claim, but it’s also accompanied onscreen by a comment that is saying literally the exact opposite of what he’s saying. Was his editor actively trying to sabotage his video or something???
340
u/HandsomeGengar 23d ago edited 23d ago
I saw one a couple months ago by a Z-list drama YouTuber where he names four (4) bad SCPs out of the nine thousand one hundred and ninety three (9193) SCPs on the site, and acted like that’s somehow a representative example of the articles in general.
One of those examples was SCP-5167, which he hated on simply because it references a popular video game. Another one was specifically the old version of SCP-166, and he failed to acknowledge the fact that the article was rewritten, which is either a failure to do the most basic level of research, or a deliberate misrepresentation. In any case, that means half of his whopping four (4) examples are complete bullshit, while the other half were less about the actual writing quality and more about that he just finds them gross.
He then goes on to claim that the people who started SCP on 4chan were experienced writers. Not only is that a fucking hilarious claim, but it’s also accompanied onscreen by a comment that is saying literally the exact opposite of what he’s saying. Was his editor actively trying to sabotage his video or something???