[quote=@arenasnow]Having prebuilt characters I do not see as a viable counter to the idea of making one's own characters in the context of what you're arguing.[/quote]

	I think you've misunderstood a great deal of what I'm arguing, and what I merely believe to be possibilities. Possibilities which, to be perfectly clear, I [i]don't identify with[/i], as evident by my earlier commentary. It may be unclear, but the only argument I've put forward thus far is:

[quote]I assert that it's for this reason - [b]Character creation is fun and easy[/b] - that there's an endemic of people losing interest forum wide.[/quote]

	To which your response has been, by-in-large, anecdotal. Which, if we're to treat this as a legitimate argument, and not a general discussion, makes all of our current points moot. The majority of your responses have been anecdotal, in actuality, as have most of my own comments. 

	If there's any argument to be had here, it would reference contention on the point that I've quoted above. Although I've offered a fairly general anecdotal argument myself to begin with, [hider=allow me to expand.]
P1. [b]Character creation is fun/fulfilling;[/b]
P2. Creating a character sheet is less difficult than creating multiple posts;
[hr]C1 ∴[b]Character creation is [u]relatively[/u] easy[/b]
P3. There are a myriad of examples on this website where people put a great deal of effort into their sheets, but drop out of role plays regardless;
P4. Lazier individuals are more prone to taking on easier tasks;
P5. Humans are generally self-serving
P6. There are hundreds of failed roleplays, but thousands of completed character sheets;
[hr]C2 ∴ Writers on this site are likely to be more invested in content that they create, than they are in content that others have created;
[hr]C3 ∴ Once an individual has completed the easiest self-invested task required to enter a role-play, further investment is not related to the initial character creation. 
P7. Without further investment, people will abandon RPs.
[hr]C4 ∴ Due to the ease of character creation, and the comparative difficulty of writing posts consistently, players are more likely to create a plethora of characters, rather than remain dedicated to a single RP.[/hider] 

	Now, from here, there are several points of contention.

	If you agree with premises 1 & 2, as they are subjective, then you cannot realistically disagree with conclusion 1. The closest point of contention here, is what scope 'relatively' involves. This however, argues nothing but semantics. If we can agree that 'relatively' refers to the comparison between creating a character, and posting regularly with that character, we can move on from here. If not, then further premises are required to support the first conclusion.

	No in regards to premise 3, my sample size is in fact, anecdotal and unclear. Unless I were to scan the entire forum, and bring up multiple citations, you can't take this statement at face value. However, if we can both agree that it is [i]common[/i] for players to put effort into characters, and bail on role plays despite this, then I believe that's enough support to affirm this premise.

	Premises 4, 5 & 6 are just statements of fact.

	The second conclusion may be a major point of contention despite the dependent clauses offering a fair amount of support. This is where the discussion [i]should[/i] be complicated, otherwise we'll just end up [u]breaking off into uncoordinated tangents.[/u]

	Conclusion 3 is, again, fully supported, I feel.

	Premise 7 seems factual, but some people remain dedicated, even without investment. Still, I feel they are outliers.

	Conclusion 4 is essentially my argument, in a nutshell.

[hr]

	[quote]Certainly, but neither are they mutually exclusive.[/quote]

	[s]Two things cannot be mutually exclusive [i]and [/i]mutually inclusive at the same time. Unless I'm misunderstanding the terminology, which I'm fairly sure isn't the case, this seems redundant.[/s]

	[color=ed1c24]Whoops, I'm wrong. I don't know why, but I'm often confused by mutually exclusive and mutually inclusive events, which is silly because they're fairly simple concepts.[/color]

	While I do agree that being able to act as a writer, and write as an actor, are both very good assets, they are not necessary to perpetuate one another. Some people are better at writing than others simply because they understand the science of language and literature to a greater degree than others, and the same goes for those who act/role play. I can assert myself that having experience in both fields does not automatically translate to improved results. It depends on the individual.

	The variance from person to person is exactly why I think the concept of pre-made characters has potential, in theory. I cannot possibly account for everyone who isn't [i]me,[/i] so I don't. But, I also don't take that variance into account as a tool for argumentation, because it is worthless as evidence.

[quote] I think you'd move beyond premade characters and instead go into premade roles. [/quote]

	In regards to 1x1s in particular, I think that the similarity between pre-made characters and pre-made roles could act as support if structured in an argument [b]for[/b] the effectiveness of pre-made characters.

[hr]

	Ah, I'm sorry for disregarding a great deal of your post. I feel that most of it was based on misconceptions of my beliefs, which is why I chose to clarify rather than address your individual points.