Why do the Anglo-American SCP Staff keep asserting dominance over the international SCP community?

by Harmony B

Chinese SCP community members are being persecuted by the English SCP Wiki Staff for expressing their opinion through voting on an SCP article, a joke article titled "hard to abort reptile." The definition of “brigading” is being stretched to a paper-thin veneer to justify this crackdown. A rule meant to stop people from unjustly deleting an article is now being used to punish people who have done no wrong but are being smeared as outsiders, saboteurs, others who are interfering with the natural order of things.

What it really represents is the latest manifestation of a longstanding pattern. Whenever an international SCP Wiki branch doesn’t step in sync with the policies of the “main” branch, there is an angry response oftentimes followed by heavy-handed enforcement mechanisms, lines in the sand and all. There are numerous examples of conflicts between the branches that I could pull from, but I have selected two to accompany the most recent incident because they are the most blatant examples and show that the actions taken by the SCP Wiki Staff are a long-term institutional pattern which is continuing to happen despite an almost complete turnover of key personnel in almost every major staff position since the first incident I am discussing, which is from 2019.

The author djkaktus is known for describing himself with his innumerable titles, victories, and other authorial achievements. In many ways, his pomposity serves as a useful shorthand for the egotistical endgame of being a big-number big-shot SCP author. On September 4, 2019, it became known that he was causing an international SCP incident by antagonizing the French branch. This was part of a repeated pattern of djkaktus and his hangers-on harassing SCP communities which did not want to utilize their article formatting technology.

DJKaktus, Woedenaz, and the entire Yurt clique were responsible for that, but it is the entire staff apparatus that is responsible for carrying out the current crackdown. Even the supposed nice face of the SCP Staff, Zyn, is coldly carrying out and is emotionless while logging the long list of people being thrown out of the central hub of their hobby. This has the assent and approval of the entire senior staff hierarchical system.

It is not just individual authors who have been big-dogging international authors. There were years-long conflicts between the Russian and English branches over the former’s differing in license from the latter. It was a disagreement that was allowed to simmer for many years, until the English Wiki abruptly decided it was now a do-or-die situation where they had to forcefully expel the Russian Wiki from the ‘official’ SCP International community of Wikis or else the license would somehow be nullified.

Now the Chinese branch users are being bullied just for upvoting. This is just the latest and most blatant example of longstanding behavior patterns displayed by the SCP Wiki Staff institution for almost as long as it has existed in its current team-based organizational structure. The Disc team is off in its own universe if it thinks any of the actions it has taken are justifiable by any metric other than feeling the need to assert their own dominance.

The commonality of all of these incidents is that the SCP Staff afford no diplomatic accords to members from other branches. They do not take nuance into account when dealing with users acting in good faith to preserve an article they were genuinely fond of. They intrinsically see the members from other wikis as interlopers who need to be taught a lesson for daring to think their opinions matter outside the spaces they deem to be acceptable. You can have your cast-off translation, they say, but if you think you can take collective action by legitimately using your vote to say an article deserves to stay around? That is a crime worthy of instigating an international incident in order to let it be known that your authority reigns supreme.

That’s the problem with the staff structure TroyL set up. The layers of bureaucracy allow for more efficient site operations, to be sure, but they also allow some authoritarian tendencies to come through the group-think. Inevitably, when the staff closed themselves off and held themselves as a separate community, their interests became narrower and narrower. There is room for technocrats to do their jobs but there is also room for the worst tendencies to come out when in a closed room with no minutes or accountability. 05Command is more theater than ever now thanks to the privacy afforded by Discord, even more than the #site67 staff IRC was.

The funny part is, the “main” wiki needs the branches more than they need the English wiki. They can keep making translations without their approval, and in many cases the best and most interesting articles being written in the SCP confic format are not coming out of the English-speaking world, but the international community learning from what the “main” branch has done right, and wrong.

When asked for comment, an affected member of the Chinese SCP community had this to say:

Thank you for your concern regarding recent events and for your willingness to make an effort to bring them to the public's attention. Regarding my ban on the SCP Wiki (also known as SCP EN), I have communicated with the staff and have been unbanned. The reason for my appeal was that I made comments under the relevant article, and the upvotes were also personal actions. However, as far as I know, there are more banned CN users who have not been unbanned, and everyone voted based on the CN translation of the article (which can also be seen as a form of positive promotion). SCP Wiki has no reason to force everyone to leave lengthy comments like I did. I still believe this is a form of presumption of guilt. You can also discuss this in the articles you have posted.

The SCP Wiki staff have ice in their veins when it comes to banning enthusiastic authors and translators en masse. All for the crime of liking an article and expressing that with an upvote. They're being made out as some kind of invading army when in reality they're just using the same voting rights all other SCP Wiki members enjoy. Scrutinizing their account activity is a farce covering up the real motivation for this reactionary action. An in-group's fear of an out-group showing them up on their own turf.

e: Response from affected community member added 7/29/2025 at 5pm EST