There are too many details that simply didn't add up into a cohesive picture or narrative. I fail to see why it matters that it's a disease, or that the person decomposes and sucks into the floor, along with several other traits of the anomaly. So much information is wasted, which makes the article harder to follow as a result.
Predictably for a long and dreary article, there are also blatantly unnecessary sections. Adding a discovery log for no reason is a common mistake, and this is a particularly egregious example. It tells nothing. The one thing it does say was that the RPC is secretly on RCPA levels of mass surveillance (people, stop doing this!). Also, Addendum A comes at a point in the article long after it was relevant and after everything in it has already been said.
I never want to hear an article about a key researcher of the anomaly "sarcastically and accidentally" triggering its effects again. Yes, humans are not infallible, but this is still ridiculous. It's a hackneyed excuse for one of the only plot threads this article gives.
This is far from the worst thing I've read. There's probably potential for improvement, but the poorly-conceived structure and general length did not leave me with many good things to say. 2/5
