Something that has always irked me about official factions...

[Blodo]

Let me just poke a small hole in one of the arguments.

Same with the Zoners and Corsairs- The mistakes of individual groups ended up with the Theta drama.

Both the Zoners and the Corsairs at the time were represented by multiple official groups. The core of their drama was in fact the lack of internal agreement, what with the [A] essentially rallying all the indies (and even some officials), and the rest who opposed it being powerless to stop it - and then the Zoners who had the TAZ who wanted peace, the Omicroners who wanted to fight, the indie population who wanted to slash and burn, etc. etc.

The reason why I point this out is to illustrate a point: multiple official factions can (and frequently will) cause just as much or more drama as a single official faction refusing to play along. Disagreements arise, and then comes the problem of "who decides". Some pick democracy, others pick civil war. Kind of like the real world I guess.

Coincidentally I say this while myself being completely in support of the removal of the single official faction rule, but I want also for people to know that it's not in any way a perfect solution and will bring its own slew of problems. Just different ones.

The main problem, and one that is keeping us from getting rid of this rule is this: official factions currently have the option of helping the devs guide their own lore. Lets say then that there are two official factions for one NPC faction who disagree about the way the NPC faction lore should proceed. Which faction do we listen to? Pick one at random? One with most activity? Both? Neither? No matter which option is taken, one or both will find themselves crying bias. Myself and a couple of others have pondered this problem and have yet to find a suitable solution. If anyone thinks they have one, they are free to come forward and share it.