First and foremost, the overuse of [DATA CORRUPTED] feels like a cheap way to suggest there is more depth to a skip then there actual is. I wanted to say that first, as its really an independent point. Regarding rest of this 7k entry;
There are parts about this skip I found endearing and others I found disinteresting. Among the good is the escalation of "bad luck" alongside descriptions of how it increases, and the concept of generating numbers intrigued me especially when the second offset revealed the reason behind said generation. As for the bad, I quite disliked the O5 Council log; the dialogue felt almost childish at points and could have been summarized or cut down as a lot of it is just bickering which doesn't even seem to want us to be invested in the characters. Similarly, the loss of SCPs logs is really unnecessary, especially since to most readers the abundance of cross-links won't interest them because they won't recognize the anomalies to begin with.
Both being said, I'm afraid this article has more good than bad. There are a good amount of interesting ideas and even sections in general that read very well, but it also feels fragmented amongst other pieces that feel out of place/unrefined/unnecessary, of particular is the two notes at the very end, the first of which feels like it is trying to self-justify the third offset entirely and the second of which feels almost preachy. I liked the article a lot, but it is bogged down by multiple of these pieces.
As such, it's unfortunately a downvote for me. I would've liked to see a bit more escalation rather than it fading by the third offset, or perhaps at least justifying it better than the end notes.
