I would like to thank everyone who gave crit to this article, even if your account was deleted before I posted it.
The idea and execution is neutral, but there are extensive grammatical and format mistakes. Further proofreading may be desirable, Chrome.
2 now. I am sorry.
This is a great idea, and at some points it shines with brilliance. However, some segments are excessively redundant, and others read like filler. Could be cut to 1/7th length.
Furthermore, grammatical mistakes and general iffy redaction greatly deduct from the experience.
Arduously long to an almost comedic extent. Every time I thought the end was in sight, there was ANOTHER addendum, or ANOTHER collapsible, or ANOTHER tabview. All of it is in service of a point that was made obvious by the second footnote of the Containment Protocols.
I can best compare it to spaghetti code; it's so long and unchecked that I get the impression the author lost track of it too. It's especially hard to shake that feeling when a certain sentence (readers will know the one) is almost copy-pasted throughout the article. The author should've decided to scale back about when they wrote "RPC-388-B-24-C" for the first time.
Anyway, the content that the article starts off with is unfortunately ineffective. I believe it's a try at body horror, and though it's not all necessarily bad, it fails to stand as appealing on its own.
The dream transcripts, especially in the final addendum, are the best part. I don't want to paint it as a "saving grace", because I would not advise someone to read the article for their payoff, but I respect how they tried to deliver the author's vision. Good character writing is enjoyable on its own, and this is like, halfway there?
Overall, I would not recommend. But hey, I've never heard the tantalizing promise of "borderline insane dental coverage" in an article until today. That has to count for something. 2/5