So I wrote a draft SCP and presented it to a veteran. The veteran, needless to say, didn't like it. I was effectively told either convert it to a Tale, or go back to the drawing board, given that the whole thing felt disjointed.
Then it struck me. Everyone was asking questions that I didn't have answers to. "Why does this exist?" "How does X do Y?" "Why does M happen when N happens?" But nobody's asking those same questions of articles that are already on the website, and have received critical acclaim.
Let's take SCP-2774 for example. Some people enjoyed it, some people didn't. That's fine, that's life. But nobody in the discussion asked questions, or criticized it for leaving information out.
Nobody asked why only people without red-green colorblindness are affected. Nobody asked how visual contact with the sloth causes the cognitive condition. Nobody asked why it exists, or where it came from. Nobody asked why it's doing what it's doing. But it's still gotten a score of 100+.
I don't understand. I enjoyed the article, too, (very much so, in fact) and I'm not trying to criticize it, but I'm flailing around in the dark trying to find something that sticks, and if I create an SCP that's a mummy all anyone can seem to say is "yes, but how many threads are in the mummy's burial shroud?"
Even the "How to Write An SCP" guide states: "less is more." I know it's in reference to addenda, but how many details do I possibly need to put into a single article before it's acceptable? Because as it stands, it feels like everyone's asking for an absolutely airtight article, down to the last atom, and I'm at a loss.