# Pastebin nkPUzwDd
Saturday, April 18th, 2020

7:53 PM <•barredowl> because then that could make the emotions a little more potent here.
7:53 PM <DrMoned> I would refactor the containment too
7:53 PM <Greyve> Another thing I just wanna point out
7:53 PM Imo the cross-reference is redundant and pointless
7:53 PM <•Calibri_Bold> Oh yeah.
7:54 PM <red3> I would disagree with that.
7:54 PM <DrMoned> I would say it isn't used well. It could be... But isn't
7:54 PM <red3> And that ties into what I'd imagine to be the theme of 682: humanity's response to something that is inherently better than it.
7:54 PM <Greyve> That's a good way to take it.
7:55 PM <red3> That is giving it the benefit of the doubt, though, rather than just assuming it did that because 079 was popular.
7:55 PM <•barredowl> that could actually be a well-suited theme for this piece, if properly developed.
7:55 PM <red3> 079 is the next stage of human evolution technologically, and 682 is the next stage physically. It's better in almost every other way than humans.
7:55 PM <•barredowl> i don't think the crosslink to 079 is particularly well-integrated, tbh.
7:55 PM <red3> It's not.
7:55 PM <•barredowl> red3: that's a very interesting point to make, tbh.
7:56 PM <•Calibri_Bold> red3: It's a valid point, but again, I don't think it's played well here.
7:56 PM <Greyve> 079 and 682 could be interesting if they expanded on that
7:56 PM <red3> Again, it's not. That's what makes it so much of a letdown.
7:56 PM <•barredowl> there's /some/ development about how the foundation is desperately trying to stay on top of the food chain, in a way, but for the most part that's in the termination log, which is fairly unstructured and uninteresting.
7:57 PM <Greyve> Having a log between 079 and 682 about evolution could be great characterization
7:57 PM <•barredowl> wait, i swear this piece had something logged somewhere with a conversation between 079 and 682
7:57 PM like, at least somewhere in the termination log
7:58 PM <red3> I feel like a lot of very early SCPs sacrificed fully exploring the story of their SCP over executing the core idea itself.
7:58 PM <•barredowl> but damn, that's a missed opportunity.
7:58 PM <DrMoned> There are stuff about it. Not sure it was on the actual page
7:58 PM I may be wrong though
7:58 PM <•barredowl> yeah. and elaborating on the core idea, while it doesn't work for today, most definitely works for more surface-level viewings of the SCP universe.
7:58 PM doesn't always work, i should revise
7:58 PM — Greyve nods
7:59 PM <Greyve> That said there are things that 682 does well, relative to other S1 articles
7:59 PM <•barredowl> that's probably why this has classic status to me. it's a fairly simple concept which is easy to jibe with on the surface
8:00 PM and the same things which work in benefit to its classic status are the same things which work in detriment as an article
8:00 PM so what do you think this article does well, or was at least influential in including?
8:00 PM <•Calibri_Bold> I do think that 682 has one very interesting redeeming quality, and that is the image it conveys.
8:00 PM <Greyve> I think the best part about 682 is how effective the concept itself is.
8:00 PM <•Calibri_Bold> It's so popular overall, and it has such a reputation, that mentioning it can actually be done to great effect.
8:00 PM <•barredowl> yeah, it definitely is a kind of blank slate for a lot of interesting ideas and images
8:01 PM <Greyve> You need all of 1 line to explain what it is
8:01 PM <•barredowl> it sticks in your head really easily, yeah.
8:01 PM <•Gee0765> yes 682 was always going to exist
8:01 PM — Greyve shrugs
8:01 PM <•Calibri_Bold> Gee0765: I actually find that to be amusing.
8:01 PM <•Gee0765> yes and we're lucky it's a lizard that has the immortality and not a real life anime OC
8:01 PM <Greyve> Didn't have to be a lizard
8:01 PM I guess that's another thing
8:01 PM <•Calibri_Bold> 682 is a fact within the SCP universe.
8:02 PM <•Gee0765> yes it didn't, but it's better that it's a lizard
8:02 PM <•barredowl> yeah, it was almost inevitable that something like 682 would come and establish that particular cliche for the scp universe.
8:02 PM <Greyve> It's image works pretty awesome
8:02 PM <•Calibri_Bold> And it's a fact outside of it.
8:02 PM — Greyve nods
8:02 PM <•Calibri_Bold> barredowl: I think it's honestly similar to 231 in that regard.
8:02 PM <Greyve> The concept of being truly unkillable is really fun to work with.
8:02 PM <•Calibri_Bold> SCP-231
8:02 PM <•Secretary_Helen> PircBot 1.5.0 Java IRC Bot - www.jibble.org Calibri_Bold: SCP-231: Special Personnel Requirements (Rating: +1874. Written 11 years ago By: DrClef) - http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-231
8:02 PM <•Calibri_Bold> Alright, yeah.
8:02 PM <•Gee0765> yes mmhm
8:02 PM <Greyve> I can't remember what it was but that SCP about inside inside
8:02 PM <•Calibri_Bold> Because something like it was going to exist anyway.
8:02 PM <•Gee0765> yes 682 and 231 both suck, but could be worse
8:02 PM <•Calibri_Bold> At least it's this and not something worse.
8:03 PM <Greyve> That just goes to show how the idea is so effective.
8:03 PM 231 actually
8:03 PM <•barredowl> exactly. 682 is pretty much nothing but idea when only looking at the article.
8:03 PM <Greyve> If we're doing that next
8:03 PM <•barredowl> 231, we might do later.
8:03 PM <Greyve> I have a lot to say about 231
8:04 PM <•barredowl> though i think we should hold off until maybe monday? idk.
8:04 PM <Greyve> Oke
8:04 PM <•barredowl> because yeah.
8:04 PM <red3> There are good articles which rely entirely on their concept, but this tries to do more than that and falls flat on its face.
8:04 PM <•Calibri_Bold> We have 3999 scheduled for Monday, don't we?
8:04 PM <red3> SCP-4559
8:04 PM <•Secretary_Helen> PircBot 1.5.0 Java IRC Bot - www.jibble.org red3: SCP-4559: Would You Like a Receipt? (Rating: +172. Written 348 days ago By: Westrin) - http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-4559
8:04 PM <•Calibri_Bold> red3: Pretty much.
8:04 PM <red3> A good example of one.
8:05 PM <•barredowl> C_B: i believe we do. i will try and schedule 231 for monday.
8:05 PM <•Calibri_Bold> SCP-2521 was another good example of that, I think.
8:05 PM <•Secretary_Helen> PircBot 1.5.0 Java IRC Bot - www.jibble.org Calibri_Bold: ●●|●●●●●|●●|● (Rating: +3984. Written 4 years ago By: LurkD) - http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-2521
8:05 PM <Greyve> I guess we can do 231 later today then?
8:05 PM <•barredowl> red3: that is a good example of an anomaly so interesting on its own that it doesn't need that much of a complex narrative to back it.
8:05 PM <•Calibri_Bold> Mhm.
8:05 PM <•barredowl> Greyve: eh, people have started leaving. i think it's best to wait until monday,
8:05 PM <Greyve> Or do you want to move 3999 back?
8:05 PM <•barredowl> *monday.
8:05 PM <Greyve> Okay then
8:05 PM <•Calibri_Bold> barredowl: You guys could do it Sunday.
8:05 PM <Greyve> Well that was certainly interesting
8:06 PM <•barredowl> i think we'll be doing it monday, actually
8:06 PM <Greyve> I can't believe we did all of this in one day
8:06 PM <•barredowl> so, summarizing opinions on 682?
8:06 PM <Greyve> Good concept, mediocre execution
8:06 PM <red3> Great hook, good character, mediocre idea, trash execution.
8:07 PM <•Calibri_Bold> I'd say it has an interesting premise that had a lot of potential, and even though it didn't act on that potential and ended up falling very short, it could have still been a lot worse.
8:07 PM <Greyve> Great hook
8:07 PM Flawed characterization.
8:07 PM <•barredowl> i definitely think that, although there's not much substantial here, it really helped establish what it took to be an early classic.
8:07 PM <Greyve> Yeah. It has enough substance to be an early classic
8:07 PM <red3> Well, wasn't 682 one of the first SCPs written?
8:07 PM <•barredowl> red3: yes, i think it definitely was.
8:07 PM <•Calibri_Bold> It's interesting to imagine what the wiki could have been like if 682 was the first one, rather than 173.
8:07 PM <•barredowl> 701 was a little later.
8:08 PM <•Calibri_Bold> We could have ended up with an SCP Foundation that was a lot more similar to the GOC.
8:08 PM <•barredowl> maybe it would lean more into the GOC side of things.
8:08 PM maybe we would have more of the DeD >:)
8:08 PM <red3> I would disagree with that. Other classics like 701 and 231 have a lot more substance to them.
8:08 PM <•Calibri_Bold> barredowl: The DeD would actually be obsolete then, honestly.
8:08 PM <•barredowl> but like, 701 and 231 came a little bit earlier. and besides, 682 is a lot more iconic than both of those.
8:08 PM <red3> That's true.
8:08 PM <•barredowl> more a character classic than anything, a character you can get behind.
8:08 PM *later.
8:09 PM <Greyve> I thought 682 was older than 701?
8:09 PM <•barredowl> i meant later, Greyve
8:09 PM accident :>
8:09 PM so really, i think that mostly wraps up our discussion on 682.
8:10 PM <•Calibri_Bold> I'd actually like to get into 999 later, if anyone's interested.
8:10 PM <•barredowl> what did y'all think about it? anything new you learned about 682 and what it represents?
8:10 PM <Greyve> Sure
8:10 PM <•barredowl> 999, i will slot into monday.
8:11 PM actually, should we push 3999 back? it really isn't much of a classic compared to the others we've been talking about.
8:11 PM <Greyve> I agree.
8:11 PM <•barredowl> and i do mostly want to explore some earlier skips.
8:11 PM <DrMoned> I may head off of here for now. My brain cannot cope with this level of thonk at this time of night
8:11 PM <Greyve> 231 and 999 monday
8:11 PM Gnite DrMoned!
8:11 PM <•Calibri_Bold> barredowl: I think it was neat to explore 682 overall. We often talk about it being just a bland Series 1 that wouldn't succeed nowadays, even though the offsite fanbase likes it for some reason. However, there is a lot more depth to it, and how it works and the mark it's left.
8:12 PM <red3> It was a good discussion. It gave me a more nuanced view of Series I.
8:12 PM What Calibri said.
8:12 PM <•barredowl> yeah, i think exploring pieces like this from the inside really lets us understand more about Series I and its place in the SCP universe.
8:12 PM i really had a good time discussing with y
8:12 PM *y'all
8:12 PM <•Calibri_Bold> Thanks, you too!
8:12 PM <DrMoned> Also I suggest 1 and 2 are early. 3 and 4 are renaissance. 5 and 6 are current
8:12 PM <Greyve> Yup. 682 is pretty well done for it's time, and the concept is flexible enough to flourish during it's time.
8:13 PM <•barredowl> Greyve: agreed.