Well the Execution was good but the Idea really did bore me. I understand why this is needed to be contained but it itself is not interesting in general. Then again, It's just my opinion.
Yeah, well, it's about a phone bill, and involves math. I knew going in that boring people was going to be a risk.
Goddamn it, so that's what happened to my last electricity bill!
I like this, especially considering what could happen if this got into, say, a large office building in New York. Like, say, the Stock Exchange. +1.
This is an extraordinarily well-executed kind of boring idea. Which isn't precisely a criticism: the fact that it's slightly boring is indispensable to the execution. It's, you know, "Oh, it's a phone bill which screws up dates. Oh, shit. What if dates _really_ got screwed up. Oh _fuck_, it's spreading. Oh, what the actual fuck this is horrible."
The boring-to-oh-fuck progression was actually kind of the goal. Or, at least, itbecame the goal when I realized this was the only idea I was finding interesting enough to write up. (Not every idea's going to come with elbows every 4 kilometers, after all.) So I will take that "well-executed" and be damned happy about it; thanks.
Not every idea's going to come with elbows every 4 kilometers, after all
What in the fuck?
Like concept but I'm not in a position to judge this SCP. No vote.
Living the dream, or dreaming the life?
I love that you finally posted this! I feel like it being a phone bill really adds some kind of punch. I hope this gets all the (positive) attention this deserves. +1
The common-divisor thing really hit me hard, since I find myself doing the same thing in my head with numbers all the time. It really made this more believable for me. Good work :)
if your reading this your gay
Sometimes teachers teach concepts like simplifying fractions a little too well.
The execution is okay, but ultimately it comes across as lackluster and muddy. It's kind of like listening to a badly recorded jazz show from the 40's, you know that there's some fantastic shit happen'n on-stage, but you just can't hear it clearly.
One of the problems here is that you go too deep into what it does and not deep enough into why what it does matters. The 4. footnote was rather dull, and didn't seem to accurately portray the object's effects.
I've been over and over this comment in my head since you left it last night, and I can't quite figure out what you're saying is wrong with it. Any chance I could get you to elaborate on this? (If not here, then by PM, maybe?)