(The following message is essentially prerecorded, so commenting will not yield any replies)
These days, it always seems to be two sides. The "good" side, and the "bad" side. As such, there are the "good" theorists, and there are the "bad" theorists, who are constantly warring against each other to discover the truth.
I associate myself with neither of these parties. You see, I'm part of a dying breed. The honest theorists. The theorists who actually admit "I might be wrong about this, maybe I should consider another option".
Oh, sure, loads of people say that, but very few people stick to that promise. My time here has provided evidence enough for that.
Take Timetoscare. He was a man of ideas, but only ideas. As such, he grew dissatisfied with what he saw to be a flawed theoretical community, and invented his own ideas. Over time, he started believing these to be fact, not fiction. Why did he believe this? Because in his eyes, we weren't convincing enough. To him, we were just babbling nonsense, and we didn't know what we were doing.
That's the biggest trap of them all; not considering other ideas. Something which many people, including popular theorists, have fallen into.
As much as he'll probably hate me for this, one of the most obvious examples of this is Blackfootferret. In his eyes, he has found a story that fits perfectly, and must be true. Indeed, he has said "there is no other option" to me.
That is where he is wrong. There is never just one option. the story of FNaF is a series of different options and routes to take. And yes, there is just one canon storyline that shows all the story, but there are millions upon millions of ways to get there. Saying there is just one option is plain and simple denial. It is a lie, not just to me, but to himself.
Maybe he will get it right and solve this story, but not with an attitude like that. Especially not when he insults those who point out flaws in his theories.
The main issue, and cause for delusions of the like seen above, is the ambiguity of the story. By deliberately withholding information from the viewer, Scott has essentially created a story that can interpreted in almost any way possible. There are limits, however. For example, Miketrap is no longer useable in terms of theorising.
It's this, that led me to leave.
I can't trust anyone, as no one knows whether they're right or not. There's too little evidence to create an 100% reliable source. I've tried myself, and failed over and over.
This is why I'm not coming back until there's known boundaries. Because despite everything we've been given, there's too many loose ends in the story, and too many loose canons in this community. There are too many, and at the same time too little, things to be honest about. That is why our theoretical strain will likely die.