What Happened to Dr. Bright?

A lot of stuff, as it turns out.

This work is licensed creative commons 4.0 attribution/share alike.

All SCP wiki works are licensed creative commons 3.0 attribution/share alike.

The image of Doctor Cimmerian was created by Perelka_L.

Channel art was created by TheVolgun

[DCimmerian]

Probably gonna do a few more videos like this to cover other falls from grace in the community. If there's anyone else you're curious to know more about, let me know.

[armadhatter]

Dr Bright is no longer allowed on the SCP Wiki

[cozyflannel]

Dr. Shaw won't be a real replacement until someone writes a "List of Things Dr. Shaw is NOT Allowed to do at the Foundation".

[Hiltonke]

This is a prime example of separating art from the artist. It’s a community copyright, ban the guy and lock his work. But it’s a collective and just cutting out history is counter productive when dr bright makes up such a significant hunk of lore.

[nowhereman]

No internet community is safe from creeps.

[FalseLavender]

Its a bit sad to see the orgins of such a beloved character fall into disgrace. I can imgaine being you a person who has been apart of this community so long seeing this unfold being quite disheartening.
I had a friend who was such a huge fan of Dr bright we'd play games together since we were 16 and she made her usernames drbright loll
It has been many years now it feels odd to see something i used to laugh at and find fun with the stories turn out to be much darker than i expected

[Titanic-wobq]

Why does this always happen on the internet in every community?

[Charly]

It's sad that so many people who create great pieces of work end up being absolute nonces. But at least I can continue to hail Cimmerian and Clef.

[Fellwinter]

I still like the character dr Bright. Banning a character because of what the creator has done is absurb.

Other then that. Fuck Duckman. Love the character.

[commandercostas]

Much like McCree/Cassidy of Overwarch, Dr Bright/Shaw's name is already too ingrained in most people's heads and it will take years to replace the name, if that's even possible. Hell, it'll probably be harder in the case of an SCP character considering how much off-site attention the articles get

[EnriqueLaberintico]

My interpretation of how Dr. Shaw ended up with his name:
SCP-3812's personalities agreed to rewrite the timeline, leading to the Bright family's names be changed to Shaw, also changing Adam and Jack to Ansel and Elias. Alongside, they allowed Elias to see thru the 4th wall, the actual reason his name was changed.

[angelcruz]

as a relatively new member of this community but long time lurker, i loved this character. in fact i even made a necklace that looks like 963 just because i was such a fangirl and i wanna cosplay him, and now it kind of ruined everything when i found out everything. it's quite sad really because i really REALLY despise pedophilia and apparently i was simping on a character that's made by one. the night i found out, I literally cried.

[xenbaker]

Fictional Bright is better than his twisted author

[asaucin]

things dr bright is not allowed to do at the scp foundation: Solicit minors and/or his coworkers for sex

[EsmeTerranella]

Its dumb how dr. Bright got wiped from scp foundation just because of the author. I hate when ever that that happens. Just cause the authors bad doesn't mean you have to wipe there creations of the face of tge Earth. Ban the person, keep the characters and if needed edit the characters so they're fine for the public.

Sorry I needed to vent about that.

[SuperGamefreak]

At the end of the day I’ll miss the character dr bright but at the same time I understand and respect the communities actions to the situation.

[goonking]

Real bright can go bye bye but i REALLY don't want character bright to leave!

[finrothsmith]

I really don't understand the dislike of the earlier works. They are short, interesting ideas, and the ones I read first, and think of them with much fondness. Not ever article needs to be this in depth over thought piece of literature.
They are what started the SCP and as such should be remembered as the ground breakers that built a community.

[Washu]

Letting this fade by just accepting that Dr Bright (the fictional character) is distinct from their author rather than being like an open infected wound by having a proxy character named Dr Shaw be shoehorned into a Dr Bright shaped hole probably be best for SCP and having something like this come up every week or two because someone mentions Dr Shaw which starts the whole incident over from scratch.

[GummiArms]

I can understand how having the character still around might cause some discomfort to individuals who were affected by Duckman's behavior, but I don't believe cutting the character out of the wiki is a good solution. You're hurting the community as a whole out of what is essentially spite and an emotional response. It amounts to punishing everyone else for the actions of one bad actor.

And I know I've barked up this tree before and nobody cared to listen, maybe it isn't my place, I get it. But I've started to notice similar things happen in other spaces, which is what has me so concerned about it. Critical Role was a recent example that really made me sit up and take notice. (Not because I watch it regularly, but more so because it does have a large fanbase so the name is notable.) I bring it up because Critical Role deleted what was presumed to be hundreds of hours of content in order to remove every reference to one of their cast members who had been accused of similarly grave misdeeds.

If this precedent becomes the normal way of handling these situations, it presents a significant problem when it comes to maintaining integrity of content and canon. Especially given how social mores are subject to change over time; an individual could do nothing wrong- at the time he took those actions- but later be condemned and have all his content and all the content based off of his contributions purged. Not to mention the possibility that this mechanism could be abused by bad actors making false allegations to oust a rival.

The environment this fosters is not good for creators, and it is not good for the audience. I hope you will at least give my line of reasoning here some consideration, for your own sake if nothing else.