My Attempt at a Objection Against a Video (Half-Done)

 The following is a maybe rebuttal of the video: “The Problem with SCP” by the youtuber “RoyaltyIsHere”. It is twelve minutes and twenty eight seconds long, posted 8 months ago with 169k views currently. The purpose of this critique is to:

1. Dunk on this video
2. Practice Writing and Arguing
3. Give me an excuse to read more SCP
4. Boost my popularity

I’m currently writing this at night in one attempt so this is probably going to be very disjointed.

Anyway, back to the critique.

I won’t belittle your intelligence. You probably know what the SCP foundation is, and if you don’t, go read it, it’s peak.

First off, before the video even starts, there’s a problem. Down in the description (yes I’m being that petty) he calls it the “Secure Contain Protect” Foundation. This is a rookie mistake. Secure Contain Protect is their motto, not their official title. In fact, SCP is the name of the writing project, not the actual foundation. There’s not really an official interpretation for the acronym, but like that’s a whole rabbit hole that’s completely unrelated. He calls it the exact same thing at about 3:40.

After watching the video, his goal, his message, the thing he wants to spread out to the public, the big “Problem with SCP” isn’t readily available. He openly contradicts himself at the end. The entire video is literally saying that “modern SCP bad, old SCP good”, and that because SCP is so mainstream, there’s a bunch of kids writing terrible articles that stray from the origin of SCP, which is horror. But then, at the end, he says there’s too much gatekeeping in the community and that since SCP came from 4chan we should expect each post to be terrible.

I don’t know what he’s trying to accomplish here. His entire video is building up to the statement that the reason SCP is bad is because it’s different from old SCP and it’s horror genre with a bunch of kids ruining it, but then, during the conclusion, the part where he’s supposed to surmise the entire essay and provide the point of the entire video, he turns around and says the exact opposite thing. If you’re going to say that modern SCP is bad, then at least take a stand on it instead of backing out of it at the last second. Throughout the entire essay the point is unclear, partially taking shape at the end of the video, only to be immediately dashed by the contradictory conclusion. For the sake of this critique, I’m just going to be going with the first interpretation of the message that forms, aka “Modern SCP is bad”.

To debunk this argument, we must first find the different points that he tries to make throughout the video. Number one, he says that a great majority of SCP’s are all world-ending threats made to powerscale.

Now, this argument is, for me, hard to debase, for one reason. He provides no concrete evidence. Like, no examples whatsoever. No mentions. In the background, you can see SCP-3143, which is a pataphysics article, which I’m pretty sure Royalty didn’t read, because in the accompanying tale to the SCP, it’s making fun of people like him I’m pretty sure (I mean it’s debatable because it’s a pataphysics article and like nothing makes sense but whatever), and it’s not meant to powerscale, which I’m pretty sure you can surmise by reading the article and not skimming over it in like a minute. This “not providing concrete evidence” is a real staple of this video.

An argument also made here is that the first post, the first posts of SCP were made by professional authors, basically saying that the author of SCP-173, Wesley Williams was a professional author and that of course the quality of SCP would go down over time.

First of all, I don’t know where he got that information, there are no sources listed in the video or description so it’s a bunch of “trust me bro”. But I’m pretty sure he’s telling the truth and I simply didn’t dig deep enough. Number one, he’s saying that the stuff on 4chan and the early days of SCP were better than the ones made today, because they were professional writers, and that after SCP became popular a bunch of kids overran it and made it bad. The first 173 post was not at all anything groundbreaking in terms of writing. Sure, it was good, but the thing that kickstarted the whole thing was the idea presented, not the first post. (this is my interpretation take this with a grain of salt)

Not that there aren’t any professional authors on the site right now, then some of the authors on 4chan that you called professional writers are still on the site today. Also, a professional author (or screenwriter or director whatever) (Max Landis) made an SCP, about the ghost of Tupac Shakur, and it’s very good.

This argument is to be continued I just wanna sleep on it and then I’ll talk about it.

Is this a constructivist critique?

eh probably not

Criticism is better left to yourself

How interesting. I’ll be waiting for the continuation.

I'll listen to it and post soon. Though I have no clue what an SCP even is.

Secure // Contain // Protect

It's going to sound silly

But how is your relationship with your boyfriend going?

#7 if that's their motto, can't they just keep the monsters... invisible?

I read this entire thread and listened to the whole video.

This entire concept sounds incredibly dumb, and is just another example that a lack of social interaction and outside time can have bad effects.

#7 u J's said that's not the title

Also u didn't even talk Abt what the guy said other than his mistake with the name

I read this and I have no clue of what is SCP even is so... yeah IDK

I'm awfully late, but this was a nice read

I gave up on the video argumentative essay thread the 3 am motivation is gone it's so over

it's so mizuover 🔔🔔🔔