My point is that a "clique" DOES consciously intend to exclude. I am not saying that there are not some people who interact more often then others, nor that there are some people who are more visible then others. That happens in any grouping of more then a few people.

Nor do I deny that some people may FEEL they are being ignored or excluded. I just don't believe that it is true often enough to be a viable feeling. I have seen people posting in what appears to be an irate tone becuase their question hasn't been answered in a few minutes. Does this show they are being ignored? No, it only shows that no one posted an answer. Most likely the reason was that either no one who logged on had the answer, or for one reson or another was unable to post an answer at that time.

And even when some people may be conscously ignored, THAT does not make the remainder a "clique". For example, I have not been flamed, with the exception of one minor comment that was quite obviously intended to be an insult, though I have to admit I haven't the foggiest idea what was meant. Does that make the people who HAVE been flamed a clique? No. does that make the people who are flaming a clique? No, because as far as I know they all claim to be acting independently. Does it make me feel excluded and overlooked? yes. Is this a valid feeling? Who knows?

Say that the MudCat has a high proportion of opinionated, narrowly focused, intense, emotional, driven people and I will agree. Say that it has "cliques" and I will disagree.