User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-25041817-20180409125033/@comment-5918438-20180416223634

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-25041817-20180409125033/@comment-5918438-20180416223634 I'm not convinced that these sites can be considered narratives. That said, it seems to me the approach (were they in-universe) would be along the lines of... Giving the most amount of information possible means we don't have to take every bit of information at face value. We don't have to say "X definitely happened", with the website as reference, or "Marty McFly definitely came on the website to say this", when we can simply report what's on the website.
 * "An individual purporting to be X..."
 * "A comment under the username X claimed that..."
 * Indeed, "According to Mickey Smith's "Defending the Earth!" website..."

That said, how is this conceivably a narrative? How is it any different from a reference book/"in-universe" encyclopedia, supposedly written by an in-universe character? Not whether the website alludes to a narrative--is it, itself, a narrative, a story? Is the whole thing one story, or are you suggesting "SIGHTING OF ROSE!!!! [confirmed]" is a short story on its own? 

Also, how could none of those sightings be user-submitted if Josiah Rowe has one there?