i guess i could see some vriska/dirk parallels in terms of "harmful actions" or whatever but i ultimately think that comparison is largely superficial. a much better character to compare dirk to would actually be aranea.

they have very similar motivations - wanting to be relevant again, so they come into the narrative to begin fucking with it. they both come at it from the angle of "yes, i'm manipulating and hurting these people but it's for the greater good", even if dirk is more self-aware of his villainous role. and, aranea's punishment for doing all this is ultimate obscurity. narratively she practically doesn't exist after dying again in game over. i'm pretty sure she doesn't even get mentioned by name after this, she's pretty much always referred to as "the other serket".

now, i don't think this will exactly be dirk's fate. he's too central of a character to just abandon. however, i think this is a much better angle to come at with a discussion of the potential consequences for dirk's actions. his relationship to the narrative is much too different to vriska's relationship with the narrative.

vriska's constant ploys for relevancy and being the focus of the narrative differ from dirk in the key detail that vriska doesn't get to control the narrative. she is favored by it, but it's often not a good thing! after all a lot of her "sins" come about because she is groomed by doc scratch - one of the narrators of homestuck! vriska gets to be a central player in a lot of the events, yes, but she also gets a lot of suffering as a result of her consistent relevancy. dirk, on the other hand, doesn't want to be just relevant, to be a key player, he wants to be in control of the narrative. in terms of an analogy, he wants to be the doc scratch in the situation.