wait, okay, i think we've had a miscommunication in here now that i've read one of your lines

i think you think i'm saying that the view of them not being in a relationship should trump the view of them being in a relationship as far as interpretations go

i think i've worded this badly, but what i mean is that you both have to not force that as canon onto the other player and try and reach compromises in game about this kind of stuff

just assuming one player is going to agree with you on the status of a relationship is what i'm saying not to do and presenting one side or the other as definite fact is going to be damaging for that

and yeah, that player assuming that stuff about terezi, sollux, and karkat and forcing it onto other players isn't an okay situation at all, but it's also creepy pedophilic stuff being a problem more than general interpretation stuff being the same as two people coming together with different, non-creepy, interpretations and just discussing how to compromise playing that in a game

and again where people get this interpretation is that vriska is capable of platonic rivalry and trolls in general seem to be capable of that

some people even point out in their interpretations that eridan might be more prone to seeing something that almost happened as something that did happen instead of, like i said, almost and that's why he'll say a relationship happened but maybe vriska won't