Re:●●|●●●●●|●●|●
by rory on Tuesday May 11, 2021 @01:38PM
(#27121009)
Could the person who made the entry write in abstract? Like what if I say: you shouldn't write or talk about beings that don't want to be written or talked about.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
One of the general principles of the SCP-verse is that it hates rules lawyers. If you try to get clever, things tend to react even worse. This is used in-universe as an explanation of why they "contain" rather than "destroy". One of my favorite examples, albeit a very old one now, is http://www.scpwiki.com/scp-145 .
Another really good example of that is SCP-1609: http://www.scpwiki.com/scp-1609
That Depends.
There may be classes of infovores and memetic cognitohazards which are not triggered by information so general that it does not assert the actual existence of any given entity.
Re:●●|●●●●●|●●|●
by abhorrence on Tuesday May 11, 2021 @01:56PM
(#27121275)
As I recall, in one of the antimemetic stories they can (with some intentional effort) remember and describe what it isn’t: “It isn’t... round.”
I believe that was SCP-055