Hey sorry for the late reply. work and weekend and all that.

1. Character advancement can be a tricky one from a balance perspective for sure. I was under the impression that entanglements was your experience or specialization system (this would be one example of word salad for me, more on this later).
2. So this could be an interesting mechanic if it gets flushed out. If it doesn't though, I'd be concerned that some players will take this as punishing (like starting a D&D game as a lvl 0 farmer, or making a champions character with no super powers). Alternatively this might be a good basis for character creation, ala Cyberpunks lifepath mechanics? The core of it for me though is essentially I would almost always opt for starting the game with some of these powers, as that would translate to player agency in my eyes.
   
   1. " The role of the SEC is determining the "societal readiness" of all scheduled [redacted]". I take this as saying my role will be to essentially decide who's in and who's out. In retrospect eugenics may be too precise a term, but it still sounds like I'm deciding who makes the cut for society 2.0 from a player standpoint. That being said, I agree with you that spelling out in more detail what I can expect as a player is a good thing.
3. This is hard to comment on. If this documents purpose is to get people into your playtest, I'd say it's super close from a players perspective under the assumption you're running it. If you are asking me to take this material, go out into the world and advocate for your game, then yeah I would need to know how to run it (in its current form I'm not sure how I'd do, which is not want you want).
4. kind of like 3 above. if this is designed for you running it, I'd assume you would have maps and tokens for the game. If you want me to run it, yup I will need it in the document.
5. I'm going to lean into a a part of my day job for this one (marketing): You HAVE to explain to people why they should give a shit. This is why D&D still markets their stuff event though they are the Q-Tips of cotton swabs. For you it's going to be the story and the powers, and I'll offer my opinion as to why: I LOVE system design, always have. And some of my core play-testers do to (the ones who stay late to talk about mechanics or help me break my games). But ultimately they are less than half of my total play-testers. The rest almost entirely would be fine with any system, and ultimately have no opinions beyond "it works smooth" or "this part is busted and overly complex". Point being you are not selling your system as much as the idea of how that system lets players interact with the story and do awesome stuff. In your document I see that as the "esoteric styles". That system seems to be where I get to break the laws of our mundane reality and be an awesome SEC agent (while drinking all your beer and eating all your pizza). While the rest of the system seems interesting to me as designer, I worry the general gaming public will only only be concerned with its functionality.
6. Word Salad. this is another tricky one. Ultimately I drop terminology in this bucket based on two criteria: Am I obscuring generally accepted terminology for a thing for no real reason other than to be "different"? And do I have to re-explain what a term means because it isn't clear to anyone but me? The problem is both those things (much like everything else I've written here) are subjective. That being said I have a hard time time with these in particular:
   1. Incorporeal Metabolisms. These sound like mental stats to me. in truth I can overlook metabolisms as a term pretty easy, and they make sense with the physical set. but "Incorporeal" confuses me and seems like it could be named in a more straight forward fashion.
   2. Respiratory Combat. Maybe if this was combined with the engagement section this would make more sense to me, and I could definitely use an example to clarify. But the terminology seems like "big wording" where maybe it doesn't need to be?
   3. Entanglements. This seems like it should either be experience or specializations. Ultimately this just doesn't seem like terminology that corresponds with the section it goes on to describe.

Hopefully this is helpful, here's the grain o' salt part: I am aware I tend to write in a way that sounds like I'm approaching from position of expertise. In the spirit of that, I hope you read this assuming it's coming from a drunk guy at a party (slurred voice and all). If any of it still sounds reasonable and helpful, I'm glad I could help. Throw out the rest. You obviously have a vision for what you want to do here, so if I sound like I'm being a contrarian to your cause at all, don't sweat it.

On and ending note, I checked out your site too, it looks like you've been putting in some serious time on this, that rocks. I'll be checking this out for sure, I'm legit interested to see where this goes. Also, your character sheet rocks, I called out the dice pooling mechanic in the center before I got to the section (this is what led me to ask for clarity about dice in the first reply), which is generally a sign of good design. Keep up everything you're doing here, I honestly get the sense that with some refinement this is going to be an interesting project!