Thread:The Clanden/@comment-1370845-20140816003206/@comment-5365119-20140816020727

I strongly urge you to read the IRC logs of the argument yesterday, and the messages that were sent in character. I never harassed, abused, or even spoke out against another user. The messages on the UDB were strictly in-character and had no inflammatory content. Many of them wondered at, questioned, or were even fearful that the MCA might not be what it claims to be, and yet none had "disruptive, unhelpful, or detrimental" content. Furthermore, the messages were unilateral––they asked a question, but did not demand an answer. They expressed an opinion (that of our fictions), but did not demand a reaction.

I thought having our fictions criticize and react to an event in-character was an integral part of fiction. Furthermore, I had faith in the maturity and understanding of the users involved. The unspoken rule among fiction writers and roleplayers alike is the idea that there is a solid wall of separation between what happens in-universe and out-of-universe. This applies to relationships and actions alike. When one of my characters disarms another character, it cannot be said that I am disarming the user who is writing for that character. Similarly, two users can be best of friends, but their two characters can be mortal enemies or even lovers. We are not our characters or our fictions, which means that when our fictions criticize another fiction in-character on a public medium such as the UDB––something they perfectly have the right to do––we are neither expressing our own opinions as users, nor are we criticizing the users behind those fictions.

We did nothing wrong, and I did everything I could to keep what happened on IRC afterwards from escalating. I was madly PM'ing everyone to remain calm, to stay off the IRC so I could calmly explain what the messages meant, but we were swarmed by virulent out-of-character rage that should not have happened.

I had to leave before the argument began to get virulent, and the last thing I remember saying was something along the lines of, "We're all angry, I think we should all take a break to cool our heads and see if we can find common ground tomorrow."

That was the tone I used the entire time.

That is not to say, however, that I am dodging my end of the blame for the incident. I did post that message, and I had invited others to post similar messages to simulate a political reaction to an event. I had warned Cyrannian well in advance that the MCA taking that course of action would elicit this kind of reaction from the Xonexi Allies, to which he replied:

[13:51]  If they choose to interpret the rejection of the non-aggression pact as an indication that members of the Accords will attack them, that's their business. However, it isn't the case. Out-of-universe, as I said, many members of the Accords are staying out of the Conflicts, so the participants have nothing to worry about.

I understood that the MCA fictions did not want to get involved in the Gigaquadrantic Conflicts, so I tailored my message not as a provocation, but simply an open question from a very confused party. What I did not tell Cyrannian is that the Xonexi Allies' reaction would come in the form of a UDB post, and at the time I myself did not know because I came up with the idea later. I should have let him know beforehand, but I neglected to, and that the mistake that could have averted this whole thing. For that, I am deeply sorry.

As for being generally belligerent, unhelpful, and causing petty arguments, I would like to see evidence of this. I do not deny that I have lost my temper on IRC before, but every time that occurred, I apologized to every single user involved. The last time this happened was during the debate over what the United Nations should look like. I remember accidentally starting an argument on IRC over a misunderstanding, and in the aftermath I endeavored to figure out what had happened with Wormy. After we found the root of the problem, I realized that I had been in the wrong and posted a lengthy apology to Cyrannian's wall, which to this day has yet to be answered. I am not a person who holds grudges, and I've taken pride in the self control I've shown over the past few months. Receiving this warning––which I do not think I deserve––is demoralizing and, if I am to be perfectly honest, a shock.

The last thing I want to address is the factionalizing of the wiki. I have heard others blame it on me, that the different "factions" arose because I decided to band together a small group of people in an effort to overthrow the wiki and make things difficult for the admins. That is... Not the case.

I explained to Wormy this morning that the different groups have existed for a long while, representing the relationships between users and their various styles and fiction preferences. Some users like realistic fiction centering around ordinary characters thrust into positions of power, or the machinations of states trying to achieve what is in their best interest. Others prefer the more fantastic elements of fiction, like essence, godbeings, and mortals with god-like powers. Sometimes, the very way people write fiction differs. Some people like to plan stories months in advance and enjoy unraveling it for others. Others take more joy in the events and situations. They adore the fast-paced nature of roleplay and the unexpected situations that arise, especially when it changes the playing field in an interesting way.

None of these approaches are necessarily better or more efficient than others, it is simply a matter of personal preference. That is why factions existed within the different galaxies. It is well known that Cyrannus is very well structured and planned out, balancing essence stories with elements of complex interpersonal and political fiction. The Quadrants have a much more upbeat, energetic, and fantastic feel to them. Andromeda was more story-centered, and Borealis is known for its epic clashes between gods and men. The Milky Way, especially the Katar Sector, curated a very in-depth and fast paced style of fiction which has been compared more to a game than collaborative writing, which has been the source of many misunderstandings in the past. It has a "you are there making the decisions" feel rather than "these events are planned and must happen in x, y, and z ways."

All of this to say, people tended to make fiction within the style that most suited them, and tended to build their own loose circle of friends. As a beginner, I found these circles incredibly difficult to get into, though when I found my niche, I rarely wandered out of it either.

However, when the Gigaquadrantic Conflicts created divides within the wiki, many people felt excluded, frustrated, or downright angry for many different reasons. That is when the different groups of friends, I think, started to coalesce into different factions out of mistrust or frustration for what other users were doing. As a result, I observed that the different styles began to get a little bit more radical and began to step on each other's toes more.

One enormous downside of Katarian-fast-paced-style-fiction is that, since the board is constantly changing, the planners find themselves having to either rethink or entirely scrap fictions they've been planning for months. I have tried to be aware of this as much as possible, but there are times when I do get too carried away in my exploration of a new development that I forget that not everyone will receive it with as much joy as I do. Conversely, it is a common complaint that planner-style fictions advance far too slowly to truly keep a Katarian enthralled.

I am grossly overgeneralizing things, and this is not meant to be taken as gospel, but I am trying to give a good idea as to why this might have happened. I've given it much thought, and I am as concerned about the current state of the wiki as you or Wormy seem to be. I apologize for writing a novel, but I just had to get all of this off my chest.