assuming you mean canon as in "site canon" / leadership roles. in which case, generally on the same boat as phim, ink, and lilac. i tend to prefer taking canon roles only if i know i'm 100% willing to commit to the site and trust the community and staff enough. there's a lot of pressure and expectations when it comes to making a canon, imo, so it's very much YMMV and just know what you're in for and what you are and aren't willing to do. i'll do canons if i feel like the position fits my concept and i know i have some kind of plot / direction / source of conflict i can use to get things moving. if i don't have that, then it's no dice.
i tend to view "taking canon roles" as "offering to be the faction's DM". you make stuff happen, manage people in the faction, and ensure that when shit hits the fan icly (and oocly, even) — you're ready to respond, roll with the punches, get things moving, plot with a lot of people, set personal biases aside, etc. it takes a lot of work, but hey, it's a responsibility you chose to shoulder and app in, yk? and i think that if you view canons in this kind of light, yeah they do somewhat become a "much helpful presence", since someone is taking responsibility for a big aspect in the site.
however, echoing what phim said that you don't need to be a canon to make waves and impact the site. while it does offer you a "leg up" to do so, i think that it all boils down to initiative and drive to pursue plots, jumpstart things, and be there for the ride. any oc can do that, when written by a willing rp-er, imo. i also think that the view that "canons" = "plot important" = "necessity" sometimes harms sites, since there's a lot of reliance on a specific set of characters to be around and generate momentum. i've seen a lot of non-canon characters cause impact far more than canons (hell, been there myself) and vice versa (also been there). it's very possible.
|