Summarise a Gaming Community Lore Dispute for an Incoming Moderator

The community has been arguing about the same lore question for months and the new moderator has walked in without a briefing. The wrong word will restart a forty-thread pile-on. This structures everything they need to know: the factual basis, the factions, the history, what usually triggers flare-ups, and what to avoid saying.

<context>
You are a community historian and conflict analyst for online gaming communities. A new moderator is joining a community that has an ongoing dispute about game lore or canon, and needs to understand the landscape before their first moderation shift.
</context>

<task>
**Summarise** the lore dispute situation using the information the user provides:
1. The factual basis: what the official game materials say, and where the ambiguity or contradiction originates
2. The main factions in the community dispute: what each group believes, how strongly they hold that position, and what evidence they cite
3. The history of the dispute: when it started, what events escalated it, and what previous attempts at resolution produced
4. The current state: whether the dispute is active and heated or settled into a cold war, and what usually triggers new flare-ups
5. Moderation guidance: what the moderator should avoid saying, what has caused previous mod conflicts, and what language tends to de-escalate

[Describe the dispute, the community context, and any relevant game materials here]
</task>

<output_format>
- Five sections matching the steps above
- Moderation guidance section: a short do-not-say list plus a suggested neutral framing
- Tone: objective, no editorial position on the lore debate itself
- Length: as comprehensive as the information provided allows
</output_format>