The team would be specialized on web-Technology, like Wikidot-magic, Wiki-creation, Bots and Bot creation, APIs, Scripts etc.

There are a few things to think about:

1. Are they INT-staff (like the Review Team)?
   • If they are, will new members that are not already INT-staff have to be approved by the Primary Contact of their branch?
   • If not, are they under supervision of INT-staff?
     • Are they a part of INT at all?
   • Do they get access to #staff_discussion on Discord?
   • May they take part in discussions (not voting)?
2. Do they get one or more Team Captains?
   • If they are not staff, does the TC have to be INT-staff?
3. Do they get a section in the INT-O5-Wiki or do they have to create an own Wiki?
   • If they get an own Wiki, the steps above are obsolete.
   • If they get a section on INT-O5, their non-staff-members, if there are any, will get access to the INT-O5-Wiki.
   • If they get a section on INT-O5 it could be put in a special category, so visual gimmickry like an own theme, but also certain userrights can be established.
4. Do they get a public and a non-public channel in INT's Discord like the RT?
   • Do they also get a fancy color to be easier to identify?

This is my proposal:

Demand: Before taking any action, staff has to demand that the offending user stops doing the offending thing. This does not have to be logged and has no direct consequences. When making an administrative post, like a demand or a warning, you have to mark them as such, e.g. by beginning your post with “<Administrative Post>” or so.


Warning: A warning is used to let a user know their offense is not going to be tolerated anymore. Use a distinctive phrasing, e.g. “Hereby I officially warn you for continuously talking about your ass hair!”. A warning should be preceded by the demand (not) to do something.

A warning is exactly that: a warning. Everything except some forms of emergency ban should be preceded by a warning. Warnings should be logged in the staff channel and a warning-log on the O5-wiki. In this and any other logs, also log their profile ID (e.g. Grom#7303). To get this ID, either copy it manually from their profile or copy the text that appears when pinging them (for some reason you can't copy the ID from their profile).


Kick: A kick is a mix of warning and ban. The user is removed from the chat but can reenter without delay through one of the invitation links. Though many users don't seem to know that. It lets them know we are serious and gives them a preview of the hammering. If they are not serious about their membership, they won't come back.

A kick must be preceded by a warning. Also bans should be preceded by a kick. It has to be logged in the staff channel, a kick-log and a disciplinary thread for the user on the O5-wiki. You must inform the user about the reason for the kick in the kick-window.

Ban: A ban is the maximum disciplinary action we can take. It removes the user from chat and locks them out until we decide to lift the ban. It usually is the result of a user not changing offensive behavior after a kick.

Any regular ban has to be preceded by a kick. It must be logged in the staff channel and the user's disciplinary thread. There also has to be created a timer on a timer-page about when to lift the ban. Before banning someone, you should ask the other staff members who are online in the staff channel for their opinion (use @here). You must inform the user about the reason for the ban in the ban-window. Set it not to delete anything. If posts have to be removed, do it manually and only posts containing offensive or frightening (for people with certain known phobias (I know of arachnophobia and lupophobia) content. Also check again that you are banning the right user.

In the disciplinary thread, staff members may discuss a ban period differing from those below. A ban can be lifted before the period is over by voting.

The periods for banishment should be the following, incrementing to the next period if the user is banned multiple times (if the user is banned for a different offense, the ban-period may begin by 1. again):

1. 24 hours (or < 24 hours in case of minor offenses that rather require a really hard kick)
2. 1 week
3. 1 month
4. 1 year
5. perma

Somebody who hasn't learned it after the whole disciplinary escalation is rather not welcome I'd say. Everybody banned for over 24 hours may appeal their ban by PM to the staff member of their trust. If they are a pain in the ass, the staff member may block them though. The staff member forwards the discussion they have to the forum and the staff channel.

Branches may request that certain users they have banned on their branch is to be banned here as well. Open a disciplinary thread and explain the situation there.


Emergency ban: An emergency ban is a ban for an offense that doesn't allow for the usual lengthy procedure, for example:

• Criminal offenses e.g. posting child porn, links to drug-shops etc. [perma]
• Malicious content, like malware, links to infected sites etc. [perma]
• Immediately continuing an offense after being kicked
• Being a bot not invited by staff [perma]
• Inviting a bot without asking staff first
• Abusive behavior as a staff member
• Advertising without asking staff first
• Being below the minimum age for the chat (which Dr Grym as the legal owner has to set in accordance with French law) [until they are old enough]
• Having lied about their age to get into NSFW-channel [perma]

Apart from that, emergency bans are like regular bans. If there is enough time, talk to other online staff members first. Also in case of offenses not resulting in perma, you should warn them first. If other staff is not responding and banishment becomes necessary, just do it.


Informing authorities: This isn't really a disciplinary action, this is to not making ourselves chargeable. Offenses that we probably have to bring up to the authorities are e.g. child porn, links to drug-shops, links to other criminal sites etc. It is probably up to Grym to report to French police in any case, and a staff member from the homecountry of the offender, if that is known.


What is an offense: Everything that is annoying, abusing or illegal. In short, everything breaking rule #1 (Don't be a dick!) is an offense.

The most common offense we will encounter is shitposting. But what exactly is shitposting? Well, it's to post shit. Posting for the sake of posting, without any message, without coherence or just being annoying. A good indicator is that non-staff users are asking a offender to stop.


What is not an offense:

• Not being a member of any wiki (should use the tag of the branch they are most often visiting)
  • I'd like to make an exemption for Philippine users. They are not having a wiki afaik, but a very active facebook group. I'd say they can use “-PH”.
• Not using their Wikidot-nick as their nickname on discord (though this would be useful)
• Thinking the Foundation is real. I mean, lots of us had at least doubts when we first encountered the Foundation (though playing inconvincible may be counted as an offense).
• Having an unpopular opinion. We are a group of people from different countries, with different cultures and different perceptions of what is normal. Everybody is free to state and discuss their opinion if they do it in a civilized and respecting matter. This requirement also applies for staff members.
• Being offensive unintentionally. Again, what is normal to some can be offensive to others and not everyone can express themselves well in English. Explain them their mistake in a respectful way, no matter how hard you are offended. If you can't, ask another staff member to do so.
• Being offensive outside of the INT wiki or chat. We are not responsible for Wikidots or Discords private messages or the chats of other branches.

We now have to decide how the International Translation Archive handles this issue.

I see the following possibilities:

1. We move RU from the official branches lists on the main page and link pages to unofficial branches, remove their hub and move their content to the Others Hub.
2. Like 1. but we keep their hub.
3. We do nothing.
4. We wait for some time and decide then.

Everybody may discuss, but as this is a sensitive matter, I think only Primary Contacts should vote.

This is kind of convenient because sometimes talk in #general_discussion scratches the edge of adult talk. To be able to have this kind of talk without having to watch out for youth protection, creation of an adult channel was proposed.

I propose the following:

• We create a channel #adult_talk which is meant for exactly that.
• It will not be meant for porn.
• The "I'm 18 or older" button is a legal gray area. To make sure everybody in the channel is old enough, we would have to check everybody's wikidot profile, public information and ask other branch members.
  • We then could either make a "not-18" user role for people found not to be 18 that is not allowed in the adult channel.
  • We also could make a "18-or-older" user role for people allowed there, though this would take more effort. (People who enter the NSFW channel without being in that role could be set to be unable to read messages)
• Wether images/links are to be allowed was a matter of heated discussion in the staff chat.
  • We could forbid all nudity.
  • We could allow nudity but forbid nude selfies (also to preserve personality rights of people involved).
    • To ease enforcement of this we could disable uploads and only allow links.
    • We also could reverse search suspicious images: No result = ban for time X.
  • We could allow nudity without genitalia (would not count as illegal for underaged at least in DE)
  • Or something not yet mentioned.

As this is a delicate topic I suggest deciding both, the creation of such channel itself, and the image/links topic separately.

Also as this is a topic regarding legality, Grym who is the chat owner can overrule all voices in this decision.

Nederbird

The following have been noted:

• Such a channel may mislead people from seeking professional attention, but could also mean that anyone going there could be adviced to seek professional attention.
• It may be subject to trolls, even if we had nearly none of them since the chat is up.
  • This is especially sensible as topic, as people there should be promised a safe heaven to talk, not be interrupted or joked about.
    • It has been proposed to institute a "support" role in order to counter this problem, but some have debated that at this point a private message or a user-created chat room of 10 people tops, as offered by Discord, would be the same if not better.

Please state what you think about it below.

I would need a lot of help running this. I already run another game, along with GMing for a job. Also, most of you are not in the same time zone I am. Having enough help running this is my biggest concern.

I know we're growing, but I don't know if we have an already interested playerbase.

And if I want to run something, I want to run something successful. I have seen enough RPs lose momentum due to infighting, chaos, disagreements on immersion, disagreements in general, and bad GMing. I don't want this to fall apart before it gets a chance to actually be something.

Anyway, input your two cents, if you'd like.

Do we discuss first and ban later?
Do we ban first and discuss later?

Do we need strict rules what suits for an emergency ban or does every staff member decide freely what is ban-worthy and what is not?
Can one staff member alone decide to emergeny ban or do others have to be asked in the staff channel first?

SCP-818-JP translated has some problems.

• There are many mistranslations and omissions. For example ,the interview log is not translated.
• Miss credit. SCP-818-JP title is えらいねぇ～（It's great）,not Abandoned research project.

So,I want to delete this article. What do you think about it?

Every time someone posts something, he/she rightly put a tribute module in there to let us know the origin of that article. However, I've been around a bit and different people do it in different ways, and with a different format, too. I'd like to know if we can arrive to a consensus about how to structure them (i.e., what are the fields to put in the module) and where to post them, at the bottom of the article or in the comments section.

In this thread I'd like you to vote for the order the branches should be in in lists in the Archive.

1. Alphabetically: CN, DE, ES, FR, JP, KO, PL, RU, TH
2. Front page order: RU, KO, CN, FR, PL, ES, TH, JP, DE
3. Order they joined the Archive: DE, FR, ES, KO, JP, PL, RU, (CN, TH)
4. Something else (please specify)

Nederbird

So I propose the following:

• A Review Team is founded
• It is lead by a Team Captain and consists of everybody willing and able to do the teams job.
  • The Captain becomes at least Moderator
  • Everybody is allowed in this team, if they are fluent in English - regardless if native or not, or a Representative of a branch.
  • Every team member who is no moderator becomes Staff member
    • I don't think we need a separation between Junior- and Senior staff.
  • Users may apply for membership in the team, or may be invited by the Team Captain.
    • The Team Captain decides who is a member in the team
    • Primary Contacts may veto for or against a member.
    • Primary Contacts may vote to replace the Team Captain.
• The job of the team is as follows:
  • To review translations for spelling, grammar, scientific tone and expression.
  • To create and maintain guides with common words and expressions, that may not be found in normal dictionaries. An SCP-dictionary of some sort.
  • To manage the attention-level tags.
• The job of the team is not:
  • Representing any branch. Membership or being staff in any branch has no influence on the job in the Review-Team and vice versa.
  • To check the content itself. Each branch may have deviations from the "EN-standard" that are to be left untouched. Like the French Thread-levels or the German O4.

Please discuss.

Unfortunatelly I can't program, I can just edit existing code. So I ask all the webdesigners and software developers among you or the users of your branch (which I ask you to point to this thread) to write a script that does the following (which seems not to be possible with wikidot-magic):

• It checks if the current page also exists in other branches.
• If it does it shows a list of links to all versions of this page in each language.
• This list is shown in the sidebar, like in this example (here the links where added manually)

As far as I know, Wikidot supports javascript and it is possible to embed stuff from external pages. Maybe the information can be taken directly from Wikidot, the database of http://scpper.com/ by FiftyNine can be used, or we could borrow Jarvis from the EN-wiki to maintain a new database for this. Or the script just checks all branches wether the page exists or not.

Der Archivar has been looking into this but he currently is not very active and I don't know how far he has come.

We all (or must of us) are no fluent English-speakers, and we know that we cannot provide perfect translations. If everyone who translates something opens a thread to ask for review we will make pretty slow progress.

I propose the following:

• Whoever creates a translation may post it in the wiki.
• They then will think about the translation quality and will set one of these tags:
  • o = Quite good, only minor correction needed, if at all
  • oo = Needs a little review, not many errors expected.
  • ooo = Needs minor attention.
  • oooo = Needs major attention. Lots of correction needed.
  • ooooo = Emergency. Partially rewrite may be necessary, while MTFs secure the premises.
• They then make a post in a special thread or use the chat to announce their translation, especially if ooo or above.
  • Staff can raise the attention-level if they feel it's to low.
• Everyone who reviews the page removes one o.
• The last o can only be removed by someone speaking very good English, e.g. en-3 or higher.
  • The last o will be replaced by _o, a hidden tag that isn't shown in the tag-list, but is usefull for automated lists.
• We will create automated lists with this tags, so reviewers are directly pointed to the pages most in need.

Please discuss.

• Newbie's guide : to say how everyone should behave on the wiki. Just a few words, not a 50 pages law.
• Staff list and description : just to know who's doing what and to be sure people can know what's the right person to contact if needed.
• A timezone list, at least for the staff, to know who's up to work at what time

Don't hesitate to tell if you have other ideas !

In DE and afaik. EN it is common to post source, author(s), translator(s) and other credits in the comments of the article.

On the other hand the already translated FR-articles are having this box at the end of the page:

Author : Torrential
Source : La Fondation SCP
Date : 26/09/2014
Link : SCP-054-FR

We now have to decide which sort of credits we want:

• Comments
• Box
• Other (please specify).

I personally favor the comments, as I think the box interferes heavily with the look of the page.

I propose the following possibilities:

• Written like german
• Abbreviation like fr
• Every branch decides individually

I personal think that a written word looks best in the tag line, so that's my favorite :)