I doubt that something that can't at all be contained is Safe. There's no telling what could change about the scenario.
Well given it's nature, SCP-XXXX is effectively self-containing. Any part of the anomaly capable of exiting it would have never ended up in it anyway. I have considered Keter, since they can't stop it growing, but I'm currently not sure.
The "agents against intangibility research" could stand to be more specific and reassuring of its successfulness. Which GoIs are affected? What are the measures taken? What happens in the event of a failure? Right now it sort of sounds like "We'll try to stop them from playing with this thing", which isn't much of a containment procedure.
Unfortunately, the Foundation doesn't have a good way of stopping it. Any and all GoIs, PoIs and anomalous communities can be affected, and due to the varied nature of the anomalies sources, these blanket containment procedures are the best they can do.
"Intangible object detection devices" should reference either specific devices, or turned into a catchy acronym to make it sound more concrete.
How is SCP-XXXX monitored? Visually? Seismographs? Laser beams into the Earth's core?
I agree with this, I'll try and think of an acronym. The devices work via a process similar to sonar or echolocation and this, combined with the thaumaturgic rituals, allows the location and analysis of of all incoming or already present SCP-XXXX-1 instances.
"Any feasible proposals pertaining to the permanent neutralization of SCP-XXXX are pre-emptively approved by the Ethics committee." That sounds like playing with fire. Pre-approval of any proposal could go horribly awry.
The 'Ethics committee' part of that sentence is key. Proposals typically have to go through two parties, the Ethics committee and 05 command. The Ethics committee find the very existence of an anomaly like this to be horrible, for obvious reasons, and therefore immediately approve any proposals with the capability to stop it. They trust the 05 command to catch out any proposals that are potentially more unethical, as the 05 command would undoubtedly object to those too, given the shear amount of suffering or death a proposal of that nature would entail.
Perhaps include something describing countermeasures taken against D5-24 in the containment procedures?
I mean, I imagine D5-24 could be stopped with thaumaturgical wards, but it's really covered by the 'Don't use risky intangibility' and 'Stop others from using risky intangibility' sections.
I assume the first list of humanoid intangibles are long since dead? Would help to clarify, since only some of them are described as deceased.
I've now tried to make the status of the instances clearer with some unsettling wording. If the instances aren't described as diseased, they probably aren't.
The Research Proposal sections might be labeled as summaries, since I'm fairly sure the full form of a proposal is way longer.
Full disclosure, I stole the formatting for those from SCP-5808, so I'm not sure how I would add a note stating they're summaries. They convey what I need them to convey and I'm pretty sure the fact that they aren't the full things is implied.
"Reason: We're not cruel, we just know when we can't stop something from happening." - I love the suddenly personal change in tone.
Yeah. If you look back at the 05's reasons for denying the earlier proposals, you realize that they aren't being cruel or selfish, just logical and pragmatic. Notice how every proposal that is denied for a reason that could be considered selfish is immediately followed by a reason the listed method wouldn't work anyway.
