• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact AKM sama if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.

It's Time for Me to Leave. Again. But I Have Something to Say Before I Go.

MrKingOfNegativity

Abstract embodiment of being undesirable
VS Battles
Retired
9,742
4,242
I'm sure you already knew this was coming, and not just because I haven't been active on this site in a full month.

I returned, initially, because the site was starting to flounder and I felt strangely obligated to help keep it from spiraling out of control while the forum move was happening. When I came back, I was asked by a few people to stick around after the forum move was over. I chose to indulge them. That was a mistake.

I don't have any enthusiasm left for this place. I didn't when I left the first time (although I had other, adjacent reasons for leaving back then), and that hasn't changed since I got back. I go through the motions of this place, ignoring the things I don't like in order to focus on contributing to projects I no longer care about. I stay here out of habit, not because I actually enjoy being here. And I'm not going to do that anymore.

But before I leave, there's something I need to say out loud, because it's something that this community needs to hear from a person who's in my position.

I am not proud to have been a staff member of this site.

As someone who has been staff for close to two and a half years now and has paid fairly close attention to the events of that timeframe, I can say with utter certainty that many supposed "misconceptions" about staff members have a lot of truth to them. We get away with more shit, we're given the benefit of the doubt far more times than we should be, and we can easily maintain our positions for long periods of time just based on how much we've "helped the community" or "contributed to the wiki". (The latter is especially circular; it means our preferential treatment grows the longer we are staff members, which in turn contributes to us remaining staff for longer periods of time.) When we are punished, said punishments aren't nearly as harsh as others' are; we are never banned for any stretch of time unless we do something especially heinous, and it takes multiple warnings and infractions across a lengthy timeframe just for some of us to be demoted to lower positions.

That certain punishments have (or had) taken so long to be handed out, after such extended periods of constant infraction from the offending parties, should be evidence enough of what I'm talking about. And I'm not just talking about recently, because it goes back a lot further than that.

I've spoken to various members (staff and regular) privately, because I wanted to see things from many points of view and not just my own. I've reviewed disputes on old threads, many of which I was never a part of, because I wanted to see how old certain grudges are and how long certain trends have held out. I've looked at as much of our history as I could, from as many angles as I could, because I felt that was necessary for me to see the bigger picture. And now that I've seen what I believe to be the bigger picture, my conclusion is this; We have a long history of problematic staff members (active and retired), and that long history stems from the loose standards that those staff members were held to during their respective tenures. None of them were kept in check in anywhere near the capacity they should have been, and because of that, their behavior was allowed to grow worse and worse over time. There are no two ways around that. We've been fucking up. Plain and simple.

But don't you regular users start rallying behind me yet. Because I have something to say to you too.

A little under two months ago, a public thread was made calling for peace within this community. In that, I came very close to writing a lengthy post on why peace has been so hard to achieve, but ultimately decided against posting it due to the likelihood of it being viewed as an unnecessarily negative take on the situation. Quite ironic, given who I am, but I digress...

That post, which I chose to save, went as follows:
We're not toxic because we're obsessed with the strength of fictional characters, or because we're mad about current events and taking it out on each other all of a sudden. We're toxic because we keep cultivating that toxicity with many of the behaviors and conventions we perpetuate every day we're here. Every time we scheme behind each other's backs, act passive-aggressively towards anyone who disagrees with us, use Discord as a staging point for organized actions against verses, characters and even other users, deliberately stall CRTs we don't want passed, try to downgrade whole verses whenever they beat one of the ones we like more, and so on and so forth (because I could be here all week listing off the things we do to each other and the entirely selfish reasons behind them), we steer ourselves further and further in that direction.

And until the vast majority of us sit down and acknowledge that, we're going to keep going in that direction until we end up hitting a proverbial glacier.

I want peace in this community as much as anyone else should. But I'm not going to sit here and act like this is a new issue resulting from something extraneous like the stresses of current events or some widespread VS-centric fanaticism. I'm also not going to pretend that this problem is going to solve itself if we just gather together in a thread for a few weeks and say 'we want things to improve' without actually addressing what needs improvement to begin with. This is something that we as a community have turned a blind eye to for as long as I've been here, and it's reaching the point that it is now because we've been letting it reach that point for several years.
I want to make something very clear to all of you; I grew wise to all of these behaviors years before I was made staff, and as far as I have seen, they have not gone away. This community has a uniquely distressing set of socio-politics that several of its members (past and present) have perpetuated throughout their time here, and like real politics, this has bred opportunism, manipulation, mob mentality and a moderate yet borderline-justified paranoia within members of the site. Tearing down verses that offend you and raising up verses that are your favorite are the two main objectives that many users in this place like to follow, and those who do so purposefully manipulate the wiki's very unique systems of tiering, upgrading, downgrading, matchmaking, powerscaling, et cetera through the methods listed in above (and many others; again, I can be here all week with this) in order to achieve those goals. It's all very spiteful and vindictive, and if the people who've participated in it have any conscience to speak of, then they should feel ashamed of themselves.

And let me tell you, that list of people is far too long. These socio-politics are not limited to the staff roll in the slightest. Regular users participate in this behavior just as frequently as members of our own staff have done, and I can tell you right now that it's been that way since before I joined this place. This is ingrained into the site as a whole, whether anyone wants to admit it (or is acutely aware of it to begin with) or not.

And that is a problem. Because this is a primary source for the bulk of the drama that flares up in this forum, and if left unchecked, it will continue to grow worse.


I hope, genuinely and sincerely, that this site finds its way into a new direction in the future. I don't think the overwhelming majority of you join this place with bad intentions, and I don't gain anything from wishing this entire community ill anyway. But I'm not going to be here to see which direction VS Battles Wiki goes in after this. I don't have the energy or the enthusiasm left to make any changes myself, and as for whether or not any of you want to do so, all I can say is; the first step to fixing a problem is admitting that you have one. The issues present within this community are not unsolvable, but it's going to take a very large number of you (staff and otherwise) admitting that those issues exist and then working together to fix them from there.

The choice you make, however, is no longer my concern. I've made my choice and I'm sticking with it. Those who want to speak to me after this can ask me for my Discord if they don't already have it.

To everyone else, this is my farewell. Goodbye.
 
Last edited:

DarkDragonMedeus

Hard Working Individual
VS Battles
Super Moderator
Sysop
21,172
12,348
Take care old friend.

I agree the wiki has been very stressful and far too many former staff and even certain current staff do get far more special treatment than others here and there. And that a lot of regular users can be just as guilty as the staff. But at the same time, not everyone is as malicious as they appear. Most importantly, no one should be forcing you or anyone else to leave or stay. So I can respect this decision to leave.

I hope I can be able to chat with you related to things not related to the wiki or Vs debating for that matter.
 
Farewell King, what a man you are.

Elq-W1jU8AAb_q1
 

Antvasima

Maintenance worker
VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
121,782
29,727
I am sad to see you leave considering that you are a very levelheaded and responsible staff member, and cannot disagree with most of your assessments.

I am so overwhelmed by my constant workload here that I am afraid of losing the main people/staff members who help me out, and have certain mental disabilities that give me a bad sense of judgement regarding social issues, on top of being constantly distracted due to juggling many tasks, so it has been very hard for me to figure out to handle several important situations properly, and they have recurrently very unfortunately been mismanaged. However, I do not know how the overall pattern problems that you mentioned above can properly be solved except through most of our entire staff and regular members taking responsibility to try to be as responsible, respectful, unbiased, and reasonable as they can manage, as it is impossible for me to shoulder most of the responsibilities on my own, given the above-mentioned limitations. Mind you, I can consistently try very hard, and I have gradually improved in competence, experience, and mental stability over the years, but succeeding is another issue entirely, especially if our members keep misbehaving towards each other outside of this forum, where I have almost no influence.

In any case, I want to thank you for all of your hard work and reliability over the years. Please take care of yourself, and you are always welcome back if you should change your mind.
 
Last edited:
2,927
973
Have to admit, I find myself agreeing heavily with this post, though I won't name the names of those users who I think these criticisms apply to.

Sad to see you go king. See you beyond the sea. Aum.
 
1,940
818
Well, i understand everything said, we human being after all. Favoritism is bound to happen, and with it opportunism, manipulation. Farewell bro and good luck in your life
 
948
452
Agree with everything you have said.
But I think the only solutions to this kind of problem is people and community trying to be honest with theirself as a whole, there is no other solution. And probably cant happen either, since if someone already intentionally make this kind of preference or distinction against something they do not like for whatever reasons, it is also unlikely they are gonna change. So yeah, I respect your decision and what you wrote.
 

AKM sama

An unKnowledgeable soMeone
VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
Human Resources
9,613
9,506
Upgrading favorite verses, downgrading other ones, the problems related to that isn't simply a problem of some people, or all the people on this site, or even this particular community. It is a problem that is ingrained in the roots of vs debating as a whole, which this site is based on. It's literally called 'VS Battles" a.k.a which character can beat which character. And with that, comes favoritism and bias. It's in all of us to a certain extent, nobody is free of it and everybody knows that. Barring a small percentage of people, most people here would want their characters to be as strong as possible or other characters to be weaker, so that they can beat the other character. And even where this is not the, many people have different opinions regarding what should be the accurate rating of something, and even if someone genuinely believes in a particular rating without any bias, it could easily look like favoritism/bias to others.

I've been on multiple platforms, multiple places where vs debating happens, thought long and hard, and I think that the favoritism/bias factor can never be separated. It's human nature, and something that is exacerbated due to the nature of vs debating. All we can do to reduce it is try to set our opinions aside for a second and understand where the other side is coming from. Not simply look at them as wankers or downplayers, but try to keep a neutral perspective irrespective of our personal biases. Easier said than done, I know, and even then the problem won't be truly solved.

Nothing is perfect and the site has a fair share of problems and I agree with some of your points. Although, pointing out a problem is one thing and trying to solve it is another. I'd love to hear your views regarding some of the solutions, if you have any suggestions. If you want, you can always PM me.

You were a great admin and it's a loss to see you go. But I understand your reasons. Lack of interest and enthusiasm cannot be helped. Take care King. We will still be in touch through discord.
 

MrKingOfNegativity

Abstract embodiment of being undesirable
VS Battles
Retired
9,742
4,242
This is going to be the last thing I say before I close this site and delete it from my bookmarks, so I want everyone to read it with as open a mind as you are capable of having.

Cheers to that. Thanks to being willing to admit the faults of both sides.
It's less that I'm "willing" and more that I can't ignore one in favor of another. Frankly, the fact that there are 'sides' to begin with illustrates my second point all by itself; this community works in cliques and views disagreeing parties as opposition, and unnecessary divides have formed as a result.

I appreciate the thanks, though.
Have to admit, I find myself agreeing heavily with this post, though I won't name the names of those users who I think these criticisms apply to.
Yes, I encourage you not to do that. If they're seeing this, they know who they are. Let them decide for themselves whether or not they want to take my words into consideration.
Upgrading favorite verses, downgrading other ones, the problems related to that isn't simply a problem of some people, or all the people on this site, or even this particular community. It is a problem that is ingrained in the roots of vs debating as a whole, which this site is based on. It's literally called 'VS Battles" a.k.a which character can beat which character. And with that, comes favoritism and bias. It's in all of us to a certain extent, nobody is free of it and everybody knows that. Barring a small percentage of people, most people here would want their characters to be as strong as possible or other characters to be weaker, so that they can beat the other character. And even where this is not the, many people have different opinions regarding what should be the accurate rating of something, and even if someone genuinely believes in a particular rating without any bias, it could easily look like favoritism/bias to others.

I've been on multiple platforms, multiple places where vs debating happens, thought long and hard, and I think that the favoritism/bias factor can never be separated. It's human nature, and something that is exacerbated due to the nature of vs debating. All we can do to reduce it is try to set our opinions aside for a second and understand where the other side is coming from. Not simply look at them as wankers or downplayers, but try to keep a neutral perspective irrespective of our personal biases. Easier said than done, I know, and even then the problem won't be truly solved.

Nothing is perfect and the site has a fair share of problems and I agree with some of your points. Although, pointing out a problem is one thing and trying to solve it is another. I'd love to hear your views regarding some of the solutions, if you have any suggestions. If you want, you can always PM me.
I, too, have been on multiple platforms where VS debating happens. I cut my teeth on Facebook Death Battle groups and small-time forums, and have had consistent dealings in various other major VS communities outside of this one for the last few years. Favoritism and bias are everywhere, and I was never denying that. What's not everywhere is a direct facilitation of those attitudes as legitimate vehicles for change within those communities, which is something that exists here in a very large capacity. Allow me to explain.

On an average forum, debates are had, points are made, arguments may get heated...But there is no permanence to any of it, because the majority of those communities do not use a database of ever-changeable profiles as their primary source of information in each debate. People with wilder or tamer views are simply seen as such, without having any bearing on how everyone else is allowed to perceive or debate the verses they choose to debate. Everyone brings their own evidence (or doesn't), and debates work off whoever evidences and communicates their knowledge the best at the exact moment of a thread's activity, not what standards have been set by others weeks to months to years beforehand.

VS Battles Wiki is not just a debating site, and as such, it functions differently. Arguments are allowed to become full-scale "revisions" to profiles that shape how a character is allowed to be debated from that moment onwards, and due to how little we actually regulate such revisions in that regard, this allows people to purposefully manipulate the playing field to their own ends before the actual VS debates have had a chance to begin. If someone wants to willfully and vindictively change how a character is allowed to be debated by downgrading their profile, they are permitted to do so without any repercussions. By the same token, if someone wants to willfully and vindictively prevent a change in how a character they like or hate is allowed to be debated by stalling or otherwise sabotaging CRTs, they are not technically barred from doing so, because there is no rule or regulation in place that says they can't. In both cases, the only ways for anyone to effectively combat this are by trying to counter-manipulate the system so that the initial attempt does not succeed or by attempting to anticipate the offending party's upcoming moves so that their upgrades, downgrades, stonewallings, etc. can be challenged directly.

That is where our problems arise. We do not have anything in place that prevents people from gaming the wiki's system to their own ends, and as such, the landscape has turned into a cutthroat hellzone of schemes, ulterior motives, attacks and defenses where people manipulate profiles and the profile-maintaining process in order for their otherwise inconsequential biases to influence the status quo of the site and the manner in which certain characters and settings are allowed to be discussed.

Now if you want a parting suggestion, well...keep reading...

I am sad to see you leave considering that you are a very levelheaded and responsible staff member, and cannot disagree with most of your assessments.

I am so overwhelmed by my constant workload here that I am afraid of losing the main people/staff members who help me out, and have certain mental disabilities that give me a bad sense of judgement regarding social issues, on top of being constantly distracted due to juggling many tasks, so it has been very hard for me to figure out to handle several important situations properly, and they have recurrently very unfortunately been mismanaged. However, I do not know how the overall pattern problems that you mentioned above can properly be solved except through most of our entire staff and regular members taking responsibility to try to be as responsible, respectful, unbiased, and reasonable as they can manage, as it is impossible for me to shoulder most of the responsibilities on my own, given the above-mentioned limitations. Mind you, I can consistently try very hard, and I have gradually improved in competence, experience, and mental stability over the years, but succeeding is another issue entirely, especially if our members keep misbehaving towards each other outside of this forum, where I have almost no influence.

In any case, I want to thank you for all of your hard work and reliability over the years. Please take care of yourself, and you are always welcome back if you should change your mind.
Though I appreciate the thought, I don't have any plans on coming back. However, you conceding to the validity of what I'm saying means there's a chance you might actually listen to what my perspective of this is, so I'm going to try to communicate something to you.


You need to develop an infraction system. For everyone.

There is no consistency when it comes to punishments in this place. Some users are warned for things that other users are banned for, and other users receive longer sentences for doing comparatively less than some of their peers. There needs to be a system that details a scale of severity in misconduct, and assigns a consistent, escalating set of punishments for each increasingly severe level of infraction. This system needs to be referenced, adhered to and enforced whenever problems and conflicts arise. (though not unwaveringly, since there are always exceptions and some things require more scrutiny than others)

And the staff? They need to be held to this infraction system as strictly if not more strictly than regular users, because right now, our staff have almost nothing to fear in terms of what they can and can't do/say on this site. Someone who abuses their staff position multiple times a year should have to face the risk of being demoted after a set number of times fucking up. (Ex: a three-strikes rule) No passes just because they've contributed a certain amount to the site; sports athletes don't get to skip out on fouls or flags just because they've scored a lot for their team.


Do you see that?

I came up with that while I was in the middle of typing this.

You asked one person what could be done to change things, and he came up with a detailed response in half an hour.

There are more active users on this website than there are bones in all of my hands and feet put together. Instead of asking the guy who's leaving what he thinks can be done about a situation he no longer cares about or wants to be a part of, I want you (or any of your fellow bureaucrats) to sit down and talk with the prominent members of this site who still want to be here and have a vested interest in seeing this place thrive. You can say what you want about several of them, but most are not stupid. They know what they want out of this place and are perfectly capable of voicing their opinions on the current issues of the site if you just give them the opportunity to do so. Listen to them. Ask them what they want to see changed, and then ask them what new rule(s) might help to facilitate that change.

And don't just ask staff members and retired staff, either. Look for regular users who have a major presence on this site. We all know they exist. Half of them end up in our recruitment drives every few months. I find it ridiculous that we refuse to let the more competent regulars speak their minds on what new policies should be made. I'm not saying we should entertain every single regular user's idea of what this site should be like, but I do think that the longer-running regular members could provide a lot of insight that our current staff roll doesn't have the right perspective to see on their own.

You're free to use or discard the idea I came up with at your leisure. I do think that it could work if it's built and enforced properly, but I'm not going to be here, so I'm not worried about if, when or how the idea is used. What I will say is that, if you're at a loss for what to do, then you should look to the people around you and see what they have to say about the situation. It's clear from how this thread has turned out that there are a great many people who agree that the issues I outlined do exist and need to be changed. I think their biggest problem is that they haven't been allowed to give those issues any thought due to having been denied any and all opportunity to discuss or even acknowledge them them publicly. And with that in mind, I would be genuinely surprised if none of them would be able to come up with something if they were A. asked their opinions, and B. given the impression that their answers might actually be taken into consideration.


I don't have anything else left to say, really. I do appreciate everyone coming out to say their piece, and I doubly appreciate people being honest and acknowledging that what I'm saying isn't some bullshit that I made up for no reason. I genuinely don't have any interest in working with this site to develop its policies (partly because I don't have the energy, and partly because I've taken up other exploits far-removed from the wiki that I want to pursue now), but if anyone just wants my bare opinion on things related to what's been said in this thread, my Discord DMs will be open. Some of you already have me added, but the rest of you can easily find me in any of this place's unofficial Discord groups. (I change my tag too often to post one here; just look for the guy with the picture of Tom Cat holding a newspaper as his avatar. Or ask people which user I am, that works too.)

Later, everyone. It's been an experience.
 
Last edited:
2,859
792
I never knew you, and only saw you a couple of time on this forum. From this post, I can say I respect you. Though you'll likely never see this, goodbye.
 

First_Witch

VS Battles
Retired
4,576
3,031
And a King has left his throne, for this final time.

King, no beating around the bush: You are awesome and its saddening that this place has drivin you this far, I wish you bests of lucks for your future ventures and hope sincerely for everyone else to take your words to their heart.

Be well my man, don't forget us in the long run~
 

Antvasima

Maintenance worker
VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
121,782
29,727
I think that there is validity to what MrKing said. I think that the vast majority of our staff members make an effort to behave in a well-mannered and responsible manner within this forum and the wiki itself, but I admittedly have a very strong aversion to alienating or demoting the few that do not always do so, partially out of fear that I would eventually end up with far too limited amounts of help to make this community function properly, and I regrettably do not have a good sense of judgement regarding these types of social issues, and am so strained and distracted by overwork that it is even harder to get the time and energy to figure out solutions, especially given that we constantly have to plan more practical than social revisions projects to keep the site running.

I will talk with the other bureaucrats about this.

That said, staff members are subjected to considerably greater amounts of stress and mental strain than regular users due to recurrently having to singlehandedly act as buffers against unreliable statistics from a large amount of fans pushing for them in multiple threads at once for extended periods of time, so I definitely do not want to create a system that forces us to systematically demote ones that help out a lot just because they get testy at times. That happens to me as well, despite that I am trying very hard to be patient and reasonable in general, and it might also encourage others to repeatedly provoke them. However, we do need to set down limits for more serious infractions, yes.

Also, we need to be able to use our common sense and flexibility regarding punishments, for example to gauge if somebody simply seems clueless or is a genuine vandal, regardless if they make similar edits. The latter should be punished more severely.
 
Last edited:

AKM sama

An unKnowledgeable soMeone
VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
Human Resources
9,613
9,506
If someone wants to willfully and vindictively change how a character is allowed to be debated by downgrading their profile, they are permitted to do so without any repercussions. By the same token, if someone wants to willfully and vindictively prevent a change in how a character they like or hate is allowed to be debated by stalling or otherwise sabotaging CRTs, they are not technically barred from doing so, because there is no rule or regulation in place that says they can't.
Of course. This is primarily an indexing site and the problems regarding that will be there. People are allowed to do revisions to profiles, before they get into any kind of vs debate, because that's the point. If someone wants to willfully change how a character should be perceived, why wouldn't they be allowed to do so? Why would there be repercussions? I, and many other users, joined this site for the exact same reason, to willfully change some ratings. Irrespective of any assumed bias and intentions, if they want to make some changes using valid arguments, they should always be given a chance to debate, otherwise, what's the point of this site? And there are many people through which a certain decision has to go through, so it's not like everything is simply accepted or rejected based on a single person's or side's whim.

Stalling and sabotaging CRTs are definitely unacceptable and I agree that we need to be strict in that regard. And there are rules preventing the discussion of topics that have been debated to extremes, they also need to be enforced more imo. But apart from that, what other rules and regulations are you suggesting here? We should stop people from debating how a character should be rated, simply because of an assumption of bias or ulterior motive from some people? Or that versus debates should not strictly follow the things accepted on the wiki? We already do the former in cases where someone shows heavy bias regarding a particular verse. Although, I don't exactly get what kind of solution you were trying to propose here.

Well, in any case, I won't continue here even though I have many questions, I'll leave it for discord since you also do not wish to continue. I'd have appreciated if you brought forth your problems and related suggestions to someone in private when you were still an admin though, and were willing to discuss it further. But anyway, this is your farewell thread, so it's better that it stays that way without any derailment or controversy.

Good luck!
4qdgi2cp9hh51.jpg
 
Last edited:

Antvasima

Maintenance worker
VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
121,782
29,727
I agree with AKM's assessments. It is also better to bring up these kind of issues in private instead of risking to cause incendiary drama.

Also, it should be noted that I think that we have had at least around 150-200 staff members at this point, and only very few of them have behaved badly and irresponsibly.
 

EliminatorVenom

FC/OC Battles
Retired
2,634
947
It pains me seeing you leaving the wiki. You are, by far, one of the most level-headed and good people I've met here.

And I very much agree with most, if not all of the points stated on this post. I am not an active member here, far from it, and I don't believe I'm minimally important to the story of this site. But I did watch it from very old times, and I could provide several examples to each thing you mentioned. I feel you, my man.

In any case, I wish you good luck. I hope we get to see you again someday.
 

DarkDragonMedeus

Hard Working Individual
VS Battles
Super Moderator
Sysop
21,172
12,348
I'm also with AKM Sama.

Regarding Discussion Rules, the staff are honestly divided and so are the regular users. One side keeps saying, "I don't like adding franchise specific discussion rules that exist to shut down discussions" while the other side says we should be much more strict with those so the staff aren't constantly overworked. And ironically, it's the people trying to compromise middle ground who end up receiving most of the stress by nature that they take heat from both sides despite saying little that would actually have them deserve that kind of treatment. And truth be told, most of the staff members who appear to be trying to be more openminded regarding regular users happen to be staff members who barely contribute to the wiki outside of summer breaks among other things, so it stands to reason that the immense overwork and stress is what causes staff members to be more blunt. So I agree with Antvasima that we should be moderately more lenient for staff members who put their heart and soul into the wiki. Because at the end of the day, the only reason some of those people act in ways that are un-admin like is because there too many extremists groups that keeping trying to force the staff to overwork themselves.

But at the same time, MrKing is right that saying "They have been very helpful" are not very good defenses for staff and former staff. Especially if former staff have decided to make little to know effort to contribute and only proceed to intentionally cause more drama, dumpster fires, cultist rebellions, explosive outbursts, and clear irrational bias which end up causing more damage than the contrast help they use to put into the wiki. Hence, why people like several former staff members who are currently permabanned got what they deserved; and it could be argued that some of them should have been dealt with much sooner had we known they do some things off site. Example of a better defense for staff members who slip form time to time would be "They not only have been helpful and contributive; they still are very helpful, contributive, work hard on the wiki and all that." And better yet, "They contribute to better the wiki a lot more than their bad habits have caused harm".

This is basically the short answer for how we should treat both staff and non staff. If someone's staff position has been more beneficial to the wiki than it has harmful, they should be allowed to remain staff. If the opposite is true, they should receive a demotion. Same with regular users former staff or not, if their very presence on the wiki has been more contributive and harmless for the community than it has troublesome, they should remain on the wiki. But if they've been more problematic and harmful than they have reasonable or contributive, they should receive a block.
 
6,513
1,266
Ah, I sometimes think that my near ignorance to most situations has helped me to avoid drama and conflicts within and outsite of the wiki, this kinda of reinforces that idea.

And I maybe like it to an extent, because I can still somehow have fun with this that at the end of the day is just a hobby, without going through, whatever you have gone through King.

You are still one of my favorite users (staff and not) here, so stay safe my Stephen King Simp negative friend.
 
I just saw this post only after realizing why King hasn't been around lately. I already knew he left but I had to check out why he did that and I came upon this post.

Maybe he won't be reading this now but man am I gonna miss this guy. I can't blame him for leaving the MK CRT behind after reading this (never blamed anyone anyways), but I've also decided to continue it even when I didn't realize King left it already. Salute to this guy for being a pretty seasoned debater in my experience as well as an excellent staff member.
 
Top