Personally, I find it hilarious how people were preaching for something to bring about a change to the apparent and stagnant power creep brought about by the map game, and are now whinging about how terrible this idea is. If you're so insecure, or afraid about your flock's (read: faction's) ability to remain cohesive? Well, that sounds like a personal issue, rather than one that needs to be dragged out before the site.
With that being said, I love this idea - especially with how well this meshes with my faction's OOC and IC organization. Sure, it wouldn't be for everyone, but this is a way to spice things up for Major Factions from a narrative perspective; rather than using "one-off" campaigns or episodic dominions that eventually drive people away. Yeah, there's a chance that some of these Schisms will be caused by salt, but this is Chaos, anything posted to the boards or said in the myriad discord channels causes just as much, if not more salt. I also get that it could be very annoying having to reclaim your Faction's hexes, but in the end? It's activity, and that's how it should be ideally viewed by every party involved.
I did have some concerns at first, regarding the initiating criteria, but I think it's more than fair to have ten unique writers and a minimum of ninety days worth of activity within the faction. You'd need to sway a lot of people to your side when you separate - more than what's needed to start a major faction. You'd need to be active in a major faction for 90 days - roughly three months - and if your sole intent was to cause one of these schisms for salt intended purposes? There is an option for faction owners to remove people and ban them from their factions.
While this is getting a community perspective rather than announcing a new rule, I approve!