CaterpillarKing
Conqueror of Cacoons
As it stands, most moral conflicts in this sub-forum will be involving political ideologies. In most political systems there are various factions that, despite their differences, work together to fight against a common enemy, forming coalitions. I've noticed, though, that there is only so much a writer can do for that. At a certain point the writer can no longer control certain aspects to get the desired effects, and has to hope that the readers interact in a significant manner. The best current case for this would be Noyyau's story where the readers that interact do so in a manner that makes the story interesting. In a lot of stories the writer has to do a majority of the work, and in others the writer is more of a taxi driver, getting told where to go and finding the best way there. The latter is what leads to true conflict like what is seen in the real world. In the story "America: Write Your Own History", the original one, that was what happened. For most of it the people were involved, but not on an extreme degree. As soon as socialism was presented (and I threw a wrench into everything and helped to add to the chaos), everything began to swirl into conflict. People began to forge alliances they wouldn't have otherwise to fight for or against the rise of communism in America. Years after the story has ended, a discussion about the cause of the collapse of America can get extremely heated. That story is the extreme case of what can happen when two moral sides can get into conflict.
In a direct comment on what you're saying, for that to be achieved it would have to be steered properly by the author in an interactive story (which can drive away interest), would have to happen by pure luck, or the story would have to not be interactive.
Going off on a tangent, I've only just noticed how many stories are interactive in this forum. I think that may be one reason that interactivity has decreased, because there are so many things to interact with. A long time ago there was a higher AAR to IAAR ratio, leading to a higher proportion of people in IAARs. Now IAARs are more popular, leading to less involvement. The less involvement is also due to just a general decline in people on the forum. I've only recently come back actually. It's hard to believe that, at one point a few years ago I posted here 14 times a day. That's not an exaggeration either, that's what my post count was. That's how I was able to get to over six thousand votes in such a short time when veterans of the forum only have a couple thousand.
Anyways, this block was much more tangential than my last one, sorry about that. I've just noticed a few things as they've been changing over the course of the last two and a half years.
In a direct comment on what you're saying, for that to be achieved it would have to be steered properly by the author in an interactive story (which can drive away interest), would have to happen by pure luck, or the story would have to not be interactive.
Going off on a tangent, I've only just noticed how many stories are interactive in this forum. I think that may be one reason that interactivity has decreased, because there are so many things to interact with. A long time ago there was a higher AAR to IAAR ratio, leading to a higher proportion of people in IAARs. Now IAARs are more popular, leading to less involvement. The less involvement is also due to just a general decline in people on the forum. I've only recently come back actually. It's hard to believe that, at one point a few years ago I posted here 14 times a day. That's not an exaggeration either, that's what my post count was. That's how I was able to get to over six thousand votes in such a short time when veterans of the forum only have a couple thousand.
Anyways, this block was much more tangential than my last one, sorry about that. I've just noticed a few things as they've been changing over the course of the last two and a half years.