- 527
- 491
@Agnaa has given me the permission to talk over the topic here.
Anyway, the reason I brought this stuff now because some users, especially like @Mister6ame6 & @Ningenron has made multiple threads and ran away from almost all of them without taking responsibility for any of those soo in all this, despite how many requests I made for it to be concluded, I eventually took the matters in my hands & forcefully made one of the recent threads close (I'll tackle the other one later because frankly, the reason for that one also involves a lie then anything) through a method that was once used previously during a similar scenario made by a joint collaboration of late Fuji & Deagonx in order to argue over a thread made by @Sevil Natas which he created in order to discuss about merely the fact that if they can apply the scans from late alpha version of a game then outright applying it on spot to which Fuji created a counter-thread amidst the previous on-going thread so I thought I could do the same and exactly that is what I did.
I made another CRT that was going to point the confusions & problems of the previous CRT thread that everyone rolled over and additionally, I also tried to fix the mess made by previous DMC group who failed to understand the story & lore themselves until I stepped in and at the end of all this, when it was all over, I asked @GarrixianXD to close both threads as a responsible member of the site however @Agnaa stepped in from the previous thread & opened it back, thinking at the moment that I was trying to be dishonest about the situation given the changes weren't applied by that point still which wasn't my intention by any means as you can already see why I took such a rash decision because that's literally the choice I was left with... Anyway, so I brought this scenario to him & to my surprise, I was told that not only staff revisions make such scenario valid but it was a matter of "consistent history" to do so... How was I supposed to know about any of this? Now, personally speaking, I'm not really familiar with the "trends" of wiki much here. One thing I understood soo far however is that this scenario was not included within the sphere of rules or atleast, wasn't transparent enough about it as pointed out by both crabwhale & from my discussions with Agnaa.
For the leftover threads I linked, aside from getting them closed as soon as possible, I want to make another rule where an abandoned thread, especially the threads that have been accepted but not applied, needs to close regardless if it was applied or not. If they are not serious about finishing something they started then they don't deserve it period as well as giving them warning on top of it to not repeat something as irresponsible as this ever again.
I hope I was clarifying enough, I only want the betterment of the wiki then anything else. I personally feel like this should be something that needs to be taken into account eventually so why not now?
Thread Management Issues
To start, I wanna say that from my first day on the wiki till this point, I've never been soo disappointed and frustrated in my life as I did over revision threads... Basically speaking, a random guy spawns in, makes a thread & dips away without taking any responsibility for it whatsoever... From the current verse I'm managing right now, we have exactly like 5 on-going threads here, here, here, here, here & these recent two here & here by ones who, again, failed to take responsibility for it whatsoever... And mind you, the numbers of opened threads were reduced by three because of my efforts as the original number of open threads, excluding the recent once were 8 before & the limits of maximum open threads are 3 as established by the wiki from what I was told beforehand.Anyway, the reason I brought this stuff now because some users, especially like @Mister6ame6 & @Ningenron has made multiple threads and ran away from almost all of them without taking responsibility for any of those soo in all this, despite how many requests I made for it to be concluded, I eventually took the matters in my hands & forcefully made one of the recent threads close (I'll tackle the other one later because frankly, the reason for that one also involves a lie then anything) through a method that was once used previously during a similar scenario made by a joint collaboration of late Fuji & Deagonx in order to argue over a thread made by @Sevil Natas which he created in order to discuss about merely the fact that if they can apply the scans from late alpha version of a game then outright applying it on spot to which Fuji created a counter-thread amidst the previous on-going thread so I thought I could do the same and exactly that is what I did.
I made another CRT that was going to point the confusions & problems of the previous CRT thread that everyone rolled over and additionally, I also tried to fix the mess made by previous DMC group who failed to understand the story & lore themselves until I stepped in and at the end of all this, when it was all over, I asked @GarrixianXD to close both threads as a responsible member of the site however @Agnaa stepped in from the previous thread & opened it back, thinking at the moment that I was trying to be dishonest about the situation given the changes weren't applied by that point still which wasn't my intention by any means as you can already see why I took such a rash decision because that's literally the choice I was left with... Anyway, so I brought this scenario to him & to my surprise, I was told that not only staff revisions make such scenario valid but it was a matter of "consistent history" to do so... How was I supposed to know about any of this? Now, personally speaking, I'm not really familiar with the "trends" of wiki much here. One thing I understood soo far however is that this scenario was not included within the sphere of rules or atleast, wasn't transparent enough about it as pointed out by both crabwhale & from my discussions with Agnaa.
Conclusion
Some things here definitely needs to change. Throughout the site or on Discord for that matter, I asked many mods' assistance to help me close these threads or take a look over it but besides some, almost everyone ignored for one reason or another... Also I want someone to implement a rule to make a contrasting difference between staff and revision threads because to a common user like me, they both are not similar by any means and disrupts the system on its head. Staff revisions should only be used for matters that could effect the already established systems of the site rather then making one-sided forced revisions on a verse. That only ends up blocking the general voice which goes against the freedom of speech and that needs to go away.For the leftover threads I linked, aside from getting them closed as soon as possible, I want to make another rule where an abandoned thread, especially the threads that have been accepted but not applied, needs to close regardless if it was applied or not. If they are not serious about finishing something they started then they don't deserve it period as well as giving them warning on top of it to not repeat something as irresponsible as this ever again.
I hope I was clarifying enough, I only want the betterment of the wiki then anything else. I personally feel like this should be something that needs to be taken into account eventually so why not now?
Last edited:
