So I mentioned above the 'lack of consistency.' Basically, despite all information of him having been completely erased from the world/memory, there's still this testing log. He's disappeared completely, to the point where he isn't even perceptible anymore. How is this document of his actions still around? These are recordings of his actions, which is very clearly a set of things that are only slightly removed from his person. They shouldn't still be around at all. Yes, I read the part that mentioned
In rare cases, enough data is retained to make useful inferences about an experiment or test subject. Though traditional methods are not effective in tracking research yield, the Wheeler-Ki̴m method6 estimates approximately █% of experiments remain auditable to some extent.
But, again, I don't get/dislike it in reference to the testing documents later on. That is
far more than enough for 'useful inferences about an experiment or test subject.' That's basically the entire test! Right there! On paper! If the researcher forgot about the existence of the subject, how does the paper itself still have it written down? Is the disappearance of the person from the world not correlated to the disappearance of information about that person? Because the way that the article is written
suggests that information about the person is antimemetically shielded as well.
Another thing that bothers me is that context AI which attempts to recreate the document from context. Why couldn't it work on those really easy-to-understand words? Words like 'your' that were blurred out of existence but are perfectly understandable. It doesn't make sense to me that the Foundation would make a program that only fills in documents if it can fill every single part in. Sure, there are parts where a significant amount of the sentence is missing, but surely it can deal with the missing words that a human of average intelligence has no issues figuring out.
Another thing is that there's this weird language that you use when writing about the locus. 'Infection' is thrown around a lot, yet context for this word is never used. I guess that one could view it as an infection of the reality of the person/their history/themselves, but it would be extremely nice to have context for this specific word use.
Another thing is that there are these random struck-through crossed-out words in the document. While it seems like there might be some stories behind those words, those stories are never explored and they seem relatively meaningless to the narrative as a whole, and it detracts from the 'feel' of the article in all.
Another thing is that you have three footnotes that are of massive size. Maybe an entire part of the article should be dedicated to noting the procedures/these details, especially since they're important for understanding the heavily-corrupted document.
Okay, more stuff about it. How did the Foundation even figure out what this thing did? Every time they tested it, it would erase all memory of that test, supposedly. They'd have to infer it by figuring out that the tests had been going on and that they'd been removed from history. How is an experiment still cohesive by the time this is over?
Penultimate thing: Why is the ethics committee committed to testing this object? First off, it's ranked keter. Second off, we already know what it is and what it does. What's the point of further testing? What are they securing, protecting, or containing by protecting it? O-5 and the ethics committee are not Big Bad Evil Guys out to gain knowledge about everything like some group of mad scientists. You said it yourself
One final specific thing: Why the heck is this object keter? It's extremely simple to contain. Just don't touch it. This leads back to the whole 'why is it contained behind such exhaustive security measures' question I had earlier. It doesn't make sense! We get that it's unobservable, but that's not emphasized to the point where it sounds like the Foundation suspects that it in of itself is dangerous. Hell, even if someone were to touch it, they are the only person who would be in danger.
Over all, I dislike the execution, I think that the writing is pretty sloppy, I have no opinion on the idea, I don't understand the containment procedures for the object (and I think that that SEVERELY detracts from the article), and the testing logs are antithetical to the SCP itself.
PS: Yes, I get that that the higher-ups may be hiding the reason for why this SCP needs to be continually 'tested' because it's cognitohazardous. However, this (possible) plot point is extremely understated and buried beneath poor writing/execution. There's no sense that this object is anything other than an inanimate object. There's no testing log where the researchers stumble across some weirdass behaviour and decide that the object needs to be immobilized. There's no sense of anything of the sort here. They're barely even concerned that you can't perceive it, which means that they have some reason to think that it's benign (unless you touch it). I mean, if you wanted to add more context for this, you could always put up a 'level 4 clearance required' spoiler or something. There's just far more interesting ways to execute the idea that I believe you are struggling to execute than what you did do here.
Sorry for the scathing critique. I don't mean for this to be insulting in any way. I happen to adore antimemes; they're my favourite type of SCP. Take the time to rewrite this with maybe some of what I've said in mind. Read other antimemes that have keter status and think about why they're like that. Is it because researchers have no way of containing them? Is it because researches can only know that the object exists for a minute before completely forgetting about it? (Thus emphasizing short-and-sweet explanations and incurring a heavy sense of 'the Foundation doesn't know wtf it's doing with this object or even if this object is dangerous to begin with.') Consider removing 'keter' status unless you can truly think of a reason to designate it that way. As it stands, there's no reason in the document for it to be a keter-class object.
