I would've expected the law to be something like "long stories tend toward disorder" - how under normal circumstances a story can only gain inconsistencies as it runs and not lose them, so good authors quit while they're ahead where continuity is important, while bad authors (often executives) let a story get more and more ambitious and full of interconnected mysteries til they're forced to (if they're moderately bad) stuff it under the rug with an unsatisfying asspull-filled ending or (if they're really bad) abandon everything and reboot it declaring they'll get it right the next time. (Edit: as discussed here by Academia Nut.)