경험법칙
평가: 0+x

이 페이지는 이 위키의 여러 가지 현상에 대한 운영진과 사용자들의 약간의 관찰 결과를 수집하는 곳입니다. 좋은 생각이 있다면 마음껏 추가해도 좋습니다. 이것들은 단지 경험법칙일 뿐, 사이트 공식 규칙이 아니라는 것을 명심하세요. 고로 이것들을 어긴다고 해서 처벌을 받거나 하지는 않을 겁니다. 다만 좀 까일 수는 있을 겁니다만. ~요릭


  • 기어스의 면도날: 어느 것을 해야 할지 망설일 때는, 보통 더 무서운 선택지가 옳다.
  • 요릭 상관관계: 새 의견의 질이 떨어지면, 아벨, 682, 텔레킬 등을 갖다붙인 것이 등장할 가능성이 높아진다.
  • 기하학적 평범성 법칙: 어떤 것의 모양을 한 어떤 SCP를 다룬 SCP 문서는 후진 경향이 있다.
  • 제1법칙: 맨의 콧수염은 네 것보다 더 멋있다. 아니, 닥쳐. 그렇다면 그런 줄 알아.
  • 제2법칙: 앞으로 그 어떤 상황에서도 앞의 제1규칙이 필요하게 될 것이다. 다시 말해, 맨은 언제나 우월한 콧수염을 가지고 있다.
  • 제1법칙: 스놀리손의 콧수염이 더 멋있다.
  • 브라이트 법칙: 신중하게 재치있는 단어를 선택한다면, 네 말을 듣는 사람 누구든 무슨 말인지 아마 알아들을 것이다. 네가 무딜 정도로 직설적인 성격이라면, 확실히 알아들을 것이다.
  • Rule of Emotional Torque: A good article forces an emotional reaction, be it fright, curiosity, longing, pity, or rage. Simply being dangerous or incomprehensible isn't enough; it has to make the reader react, as well.
  • Alten's Observation: Just because it's threatening doesn't make it frightening. Danger alone will not carry an article.
  • The Fundamental Base of the Unsaid: Redacting and Expunging are not used for fear. They're used to hide knowledge. The fear created is the possibility, implication, or terror of what might be there. Because essentially, the imagination of the person reading the article is the one filling in the gap, and they can always frighten themselves better than you can.
  • Rule of Ridiculous Redactions: Redacting/expunging information in the containment procedures is silly. In universe, they tell you how to properly handle the SCP, and what to do if it escapes. Does it ever make sense to hide that information?
  • The Quality Conundrum: If you spend long enough on the site, articles which you least expect to succeed will begin to be higher rated than what you consider your better work. This is because new users have no standards.
  • 킹 상수: 사과씨앗.
  • 트로이의 보편 추측: 최선의 해피엔딩은 있을 수 없다. 배드 엔딩, 굿 엔딩, 어쩌면 해피엔딩도 있을 수 있지만, 최고 해피엔딩은 없다. 그건 소설이 아니라 동화에 불과하다. Taint the good with a touch of suffering, and you'll get the effect you want.
  • 샐의 경고: 채팅방에 있는 사람들이 뭘 올리지 말라고 하면, 그건 올리면 안 되는 것이다.
  • 소츠의 법칙: 정신자 효과 + 미쳐서 뒈짐 = 실패작.
  • 소츠의 법칙의 필연적 결과: If your SCP compels people to use it for no good reason, people will feel compelled to downvote. It reads like cheap, tacked-on danger.
  • 제1법칙: If you pretend you've read the guide materials and haven't actually done so, we will be able to tell, and you will look stupid.
  • Rule of Lists: If somebody tells you that your draft is bad, and they point you toward a list of rules instead of telling you exactly why it's bad, it's likely not all that bad.
  • First Rule of Lists: If somebody tells you that your draft is bad, when they point you toward a list of rules and tell you exactly which points are causing it problems, it's not bad, it's likely far worse.
  • Second Rule of Lists: That doesn't mean that people won't downvote it just for that reason.
  • Quik의 충고: From the days when applicants to the wiki had to come get advice from a chat op…
    1. You cannot please everyone all the time.
    2. Keep a thick skin— people around here are brutally honest.
    3. When in doubt, lurk more.
    4. You cannot be certain what people will really like— or really hate.
    5. Don't pour your heart and soul into an SCP before it's posted— wait until you know it's going to stick.
  • 재단 이야기 제1법칙: No one reads Foundation Tales. Well. Many users choose to read Foundation tales without ever voting on them, which is annoying. Expect a Tale's rise to popularity to come very… very… slowly…
  • 재단 이야기 제2법칙: A tale that is funny, or does something cool, is more likely to be upvoted than one that is creepy or in tone with the site. Which is one of the reasons we have Foundation tales.
  • 재단 이야기 제3법칙: Don't expect something to get changed over your tale. No one should be expected to update their author profile, article they wrote, or one of their tales for the sake of your story.
  • Law of Authorial Insight: Redaction is not a substitute for coming up with something interesting. The author should always know what's been "removed" from the article.
  • 기어스의 공리: If you look at your new SCP, and don't feel a little uneasy about your own mental state, or worry that others might think you're starting to get unhinged, it probably needs a bit more work.
  • 과잉 위험 법칙: Making something more dangerous does not necessarily make it creepier or more interesting. Neither does increasing its threat classification - Keter is not automatically better than Euclid or Safe. Thus, tacking on extra dangerousness (see Sorts' Law above for a couple of common examples) is a waste of time and will probably lower the quality of the article.
  • 그림 제1법칙: SCP에 그림을 넣으면 보통 더 좋다.
  • 그림 제2법칙: 네가 구상하는 것을 묘사하기 위해 글이 많이 필요한 만큼 그림도 많이 필요하게 된다.
  • 그림 제3법칙: No matter how "totally awesome" and "fucking badass" that drawing is, scrap it. The only artist's impression you're going to get is the bootprint on your article when people downvote it.
  • 그림 제4법칙: You probably don't want to use a picture where readers will easily recognize the source. Movie stills, pictures from other creepypasta, etc. will make your SCP feel like a rip-off.
  • 스캔트론의 경험법칙: Your article should be longer than your thumb.
  • Tuomey's Relation: As the amount of articles a person has read approaches zero, the percentage chance they are doing it wrong approaches 100.
  • Real Life Rule: If a real live thing is made into an SCP, the SCP article must be at least as interesting as that real live thing.
  • SCPs in the Tall Grass Rule: All stories detailing how an SCP was discovered should follow the following criteria:
    • The story should add to the article. It is not necessary to show how every SCP was discovered. Sometimes, not including a discovery story adds to an article.
    • The story should be believable. The Foundation is a huge international super-governmental organization. SCPs should not be discovered when an agent finds them on the ground or they make a scene one time.
    • The Foundation is perfectly capable of being the first on the trail. MC&D, the CI, and the GOC don’t have to discover an SCP before the Foundation does.
  • 비평의 법칙: 표는 한 사람 앞에 똑같이 한 개 씩이지만, 어떤 토론 코멘트는 다른 코멘트보다 더 가치있다.
  • Technical vs. Creative Rule: Bad writing can be fixed, but bad ideas are eternal.
  • 디테일 보존 제1법칙: 디테일은 중요하지만, 너무 많은 디테일은 SCP를 지나치게 복잡하게 만들 수 있다. Y하는 X 라는 문장과 B는 Y와 어째저째 함께 발생할 수 있는데 A 또는 B가 발생할 경우 Z하지 않으면 Y하는 X 라는 문장을 비교해 보시라.
  • 디테일 보존 제2법칙: 지금 쓰려는 부록이 정말 어떤 중요한 쓸모가 있는 것인가?
  • Bib's Rule Of Slay's Flavor Text: Just like Phyrexian invasions, only numbers (votes) matter in the end. You'll never please everyone, and the more people upvote your work, the less weight any one singular criticism has. A person criticizing a +2 article has a point. A person criticizing a +40 one doesn't matter.
  • 클레프의 법칙: 다음 중 한 가지라도 해당된다면, 그 SCP는 후지다.
    • “Z할 때 Y 하는 X.”
    • “X를 존나 잘하는 X.”
    • “Y하지 않으면 너를 죽이는 X.”
    • “대중문화 Z에 나오는 문자 그대로 Y인 X.”
  • The Vampire Diaries Insight: "There's no such thing as a bad idea. Only poorly executed awesome ones."
    • Clef's Addendum: "However, some ideas need to be executed perfectly to cross the line into awesome."
    • Addendum to Clef's Addendum: 99% of the people writing up bad ideas don't realize their idea is bad. Therefore they are not the person who is going to execute it well enough to succeed.
  • 아이젠베르크 불확정성 원리: Uncertainty is a crucial ingredient in technobabble. Redacting sensitive new scientific knowledge, and admitting that a phenomenon is an unexplained anomaly evokes a document written by people on the cutting edge of science. False statements about known science, and non-sequiturs reeking of fundamental lack of understading evoke Deepak Chopra.
    • Spikebrennan's Spackle: Redaction can mask a small plot hole or gap in logic, but not a major one. Maintaining suspension of disbelief requires knowing the difference.
  • Mind the Ceiling Rule: When designing containment cells, keep in mind that not all rooms are cubic.
  • Desirable Item Rule: SCPs that you would want should also be SCPs that you are worried about someone else having.
  • Outside View Rule: Before posting an article, read it as though you were reading someone else's work for the first time. If you wouldn't upvote it, then it's likely that neither would they.
  • Chesterton's Observation: "It really is more natural to believe a preternatural story, that deals with things we don't understand, than a natural story that contradicts things we do understand. Tell me that the great Mr. Gladstone, in his last hours, was haunted by the ghost of Parnell, and I will be agnostic about it. But tell me that Mr. Gladstone, when first presented to Queen Victoria, wore his hat in her drawingroom and slapped her on the back and offered her a cigar, and I am not agnostic at all. That is not impossible, it's only incredible. But I'm much more certain it didn't happen than that Parnell's ghost didn't appear; because it violates the laws of the world I do understand."1

    The lesson here is, fiction necessarily involves making up "facts". Some conceivable "facts" enrich the work, others will damage the reader's suspension of disbelief and therefore impair the quality of the work. To a significant extent, good writing consists of knowing the difference.
  • Reject's Easter Special Rule: Easter eggs can be written into SCPs effectively. However, the point of Easter eggs is that you have to hunt for them. So if you choose to add one, don't make it really obvious, stupid, or random.
    • As an aside, there is a difference between an Easter egg, a hook, and a cross-reference. Don't mix them up, or your article will be downvoted.
  • Separation Relation: As an SCP becomes more similar to an existing article, the likelihood of it receiving upvotes approaches zero.
    • Bib's Addendum: A single (or few) similarities between your SCP and another are not dealbreakers, provided the differences are substantial enough.
  • 법칙 무시의 법칙: 이 규칙들 중 어느 것이라도 무시할 수 있지만, 그 결과물이 볼만해야 할 것이다.
  • 예이츠의 비평 법칙: The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.
  • Rule 682: If it exists, there's 682 of it.
  • 연구의 법칙: Know your shit. Technobabble/jargon is one thing, [REDACTED] is another, 'pineapple' is a third. If you try to make up facts and you're caught, you'll look like an idiot (or at the very least, wrong). Pineapples are not (generally) sapient, so make sure to use your terms correctly.
  • 연구의 제2법칙: The point of an experiment is to find out things not currently known about the object being experimented upon. If the experiment log of an object (which should summarize key results) includes several tests with identical procedure , producing identical results, you are doing it wrong.
  • E.의 트롤 이론: Never attribute to trolling what can be explained by incompetence.
  • H.L. Mencken's Law of Simple Solutions: For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
  • 아이젠베르크의 관찰 - An SCP is like a revolutionary tribunal - all about the execution.
  • Rule of Coolness Conservation: Unless there is an exceedingly good reason for it, an article will be made worse by the inclusion of Are We Cool Yet?
  • Drewbear's Warning of Newbie Feedback Looping: Although good comments and critiques can come from new members, remember that they are, by definition, much less experienced in what works and what doesn't than more established contributors. Don't rely entirely on feedback, bad OR good, from other newbies.
  • Toxic Empathy Rule: When we read about an SCP doing something to someone, or read about a humanoid SCP, our natural tendency is to try and empathize with the person in question. A good article will punish us for this instinct without being so over-the-top that we're forced to sever the connection.
  • Informal Explanation Protip: The use of quotes to provide an informal explanation of something in an SCP should supplement a clinical description of the phenomenon, not replace it.
  • 사실주의 대화 실험: 대화를 쓸 때는, 한 번 큰 소리로 읽어 보시라. 뭔가 부자연스러움이 느껴진다면, 아무도 그런 말을 할 리가 없기 때문이다.
  • Tox's Law of Ideas: The newer a member is, and the more "omg awsum!!!" they think their idea is, the more likely it is to suck.
  • Item Relatability Relation: Getting people to relate to your article is done not by making it something that everyone ever might have or be exposed to, it's done by choosing something that makes them feel singled out. The key is to know your audience and their lives.
  • Special Snowflake Rule: If you find yourself having to argue with people (especially if they are more experienced writers than you) over whether your idea/draft is good, it probably isn't. You will reach a point where people will conclude that you just can't accept criticism. Don't reach that point.
  • Anax's Rule of Hooks: What the object is should not itself be the hook.
  • 마요네즈 법칙: Squick and shock are to an article what mayonnaise is to food. It can greatly improve an otherwise bland fare when used in proper amounts, which vary - some people like to lay it on with a trowel, others like just a dash. However, most everyone agrees mayonnaise alone makes for a poor meal.