Denied Rework SCP Report Clipboard Document Layout

[ChillWii]

You should do the same thing you did with the Foundation Research Study Layout which has Example:

---

Research Title: Title

---

Conducted By: N/A

---

Authorized By: N/A

---

SCP Subjects: N/A

---

Participating Subjects: N/A

---

But instead of having it say those things put it like this Example: the image below

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
add my closest depiction of a classic foundation report document from scp containment breach with enhanced graphics, I think you should add bold as it may not work properly if you add it later.

[A] Possible Positives of the suggestion: (At least 2)
you could replace the foundation research study document or Foundation report document, therefore, decreasing the download to fasten it (if you want to), It increases the space for more sentences, and has info on clearance level, object class, date, page number, and classified or confidential in the bottom, item number (AKA SCP), and adds creative choice with it being customizable from the confidential to classified & item number, object class, clearance level, and more room for sentences.

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
it's likely very hard to code it in the game and with the already existing foundation research study document & foundation research study document, in other words, it may be more trouble than it's worth. I wouldn't know any other negatives because I'm a graphics designer and not a coder.

[C] Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
I put a lot of man-hours into making this I would be bummed out if it got rejected, other than that it is up to you to decide.

 

[Juju]

+Support Great Idea Maybe Still have Authed by And Researcher and Amount of Personnel Though

 

[Playboi CARTI SLAT]

+SUPPORT Great idea I love it

 

[Mr. White The HeisenBerg]

+Support
I would love to have a working classic document from CB

 

[Juju]

Good Idea.

 

[WarThunderPlayer]

Support+
Great example image
good idea
it could replace both of the old documents with one individual document
more info on one page
it can have more room for words

 

[Silverback]

+/- Neutral
Don't exactly like it nor hate it

 

[MrSiens]

-Support
This new format would communicate too little information, leaving out many aspects required for the management of document approvals.
Would be severely detrimental.

 

[Zero Hero]

-Support
This new format would communicate too little information, leaving out many aspects required for the management of document approvals.

I disagree. The SCP Foundation is a bureaucratic hellscape that thrives off of it's paper trail. This fits exactly that bill.
All of the current information on display in the study format can still be manually displayed by the author, and the current header doesn't have a huge impact on grading. Hell, I've given "Excellent" grades to some reports which didnt utilize the research study format at all.

 

[MrSiens]

I disagree. The SCP Foundation is a bureaucratic hellscape that thrives off of it's paper trail. This fits exactly that bill.
All of the current information on display in the study format can still be manually displayed by the author, and the current header doesn't have a huge impact on grading.

This includes neither author nor title,author being probably the most important part of a document to be able to quickly access.

People CAN include anything, but the fact these vital pieces of information are near the first thing people see when they start writing allows newer people to know to include them just via the format. These things are less obvious than one would think, some people for example do not think to include their own name, making approvals much more arduous than they need to be.

Do note that the SteamID of an uploaded document is not visible in the approval window itself, making that not a viable option to track down an author for the required feedback and or reward they are entitled to.

Im glad we agree however that this would make it actively worse and more annoying to deal with documents.
Where we disagree is that "thats not a good thing."

 

[Crow Kalashnikov]

-Support

 

[Deleted member 3942]

-Support
This new format would communicate too little information, leaving out many aspects required for the management of document approvals.
Would be severely detrimental.

-Support
For the same reason, some more standard information would need to be included in the base format to fill out.

 

[Nebula]

+Support

As a guide-writer I see no harm if it's just a reskin rather than completely changing the inbuilt features. If this was part of the suggestion then what would dictate my '+' or '-' would be the impact on document formatting, documents still need to be customizable to look as clean and sexy as possible. Anything from classic CB is great for immersion and certainly a notable suggestion imo.

 

[ChillWii]

I disagree. The SCP Foundation is a bureaucratic hellscape that thrives off of it's paper trail. This fits exactly that bill.
All of the current information on display in the study format can still be manually displayed by the author, and the current header doesn't have a huge impact on grading. Hell, I've given "Excellent" grades to some reports which didnt utilize the research study format at all.

This includes neither author nor title,author being probably the most important part of a document to be able to quickly access.

People CAN include anything, but the fact these vital pieces of information are near the first thing people see when they start writing allows newer people to know to include them just via the format. These things are less obvious than one would think, some people for example do not think to include their own name, making approvals much more arduous than they need to be.

Do note that the SteamID of an uploaded document is not visible in the approval window itself, making that not a viable option to track down an author for the required feedback and or reward they are entitled to.

Im glad we agree however that this would make it actively worse and more annoying to deal with documents.
Where we disagree is that "thats not a good thing."

Reminder: this is a classic Containment Breach document; adding the details ourselves that the document report is missing, is unauthentic to CB’s original document, and feels dishonest to the game that I’ve played and so many others have, and enjoyed. I mean most of us wouldn’t even know about SCP’s or make any games, videos or anything inspired by it if it wasn’t the way it was, why should we is the question…

even the rules say I can’t add multiple ideas in one post if I want to I have to make seperate posts.

I’m sorry if I'm ranting but it seems noone has any respect for the originality of my format. If the admins/owners decide to add it so be it, if they decide to change it so be it, if they decide to deny it so be it.

 

[MrSiens]

Reminder: this is a classic Containment Breach document; adding the details ourselves that the document report is missing, is unauthentic to CB’s original document, and feels dishonest to the game that I’ve played and so many others have, and enjoyed. I mean most of us wouldn’t even know about SCP’s or make any games, videos or anything inspired by it if it wasn’t the way it was, why should we is the question…

And?
This is information that is required for how documents work on this server, it being "inauthentic" is irrelevant. This is not containment breach, these documents serve a different function than they do in CB.

in CB, the documents are mostly object files themselves, as seen by the format. While on the server, these are documented individual trials, hypotheses or other works of creative writing, These are the research studies that collect the information that would end up going onto an SCP File, thus being an entirely different type of document.

I mean most of us wouldn’t even know about SCP’s or make any games, videos or anything inspired by it if it wasn’t the way it was, why should we is the question…

CB is not sacred, this format of document is not beneficial for Research RP on this server and would be actively detrimental, this is why it would need to be edited to suit the needs of the server, or "dont fix what aint broke".

Even then, the exact way these documents are formatted is not the thing that makes or breaks CB, saying it could be different is not some act of Heresy.

 

[Judge]

+ SUPPORT

 

[ChillWii]

And?
This is information that is required for how documents work on this server, it being "inauthentic" is irrelevant. This is not containment breach, these documents serve a different function than they do in CB.

in CB, the documents are mostly object files themselves, as seen by the format. While on the server, these are documented individual trials, hypotheses or other works of creative writing, These are the research studies that collect the information that would end up going onto an SCP File, thus being an entirely different type of document.


CB is not sacred, this format of document is not beneficial for Research RP on this server and would be actively detrimental, this is why it would need to be edited to suit the needs of the server, or "dont fix what aint broke".

Even then, the exact way these documents are formatted is not the thing that makes or breaks CB, saying it could be different is not some act of

Name and Title can be added at the discretion of the author if they don't just grade them poorly for it, other than that its creativity at its finest; a blank page inspires creativity. the index and all of its related info will still be in the document however the certain info that was in the top right corner will not be there as it interferes with the idea of a classic CB document.

 

[L.Saint]

Suggestion Denied​

---

Hi @ChillWii,

Thanks for taking the time to make a server suggestion. At present we do not see a need to make an alternative format for the documents.

Your suggestion will now be locked and marked as denied.​