Thread:Merrystar/@comment-184.151.37.85-20150822161117

Hi. Ive been observing Wikia for a while, and ive noticed several disturbing things. 1. Admins have a genuine tendency to hand out harsh sentences due to misunderstandings on the part of a user, or will throw out a ban without telling users. 2. Some admins are made admins even though they have commited serious offences in other wikis such as socking, or making senseless drama in other wikis, usually without checking as per Wikia protocol. 3. Some users are banned due to their history, and are usually accused or held to blame when an incident is ignited by accident. In some instances they have been banned due to these incidents under a pretext of a minor charge without having their say. 4. Other users have been biased against by admins due to views, speaking out against them, and have outright threatened them or banned them unfairly, which certainly goes against Wikia's rules of admins must be impartial. 5. Admins will not allow compromise on an issue even if a large amount of wiki users ask for a compromise, which usually creates a conflict.They also will implement changes without ever telling users and therefore people don't give their input without a fair vote, as per Wikia protocol. To deal with this, I propose several reforms. 1. A change in the Terms of Use which declares that all canditates for admins must have a through check across all of Wikia to see if they have good records. If they have commited serious offences on other wikis, then they are informed they cannot qualify. 2. Admins also cannot hand out harsh sentences if the cause of the problem was due to a misunderstanding, and the recipient of the sentence must be notified of what was commited. 3. Should a user with a history been involved in an incident that was sparked by accident, they cannot be held to blame for the incident. They also cannot be banned under a minor pretext or without their knowledge. 4. Admins that are biased will face punishment, such as a hefty fine, which I will explain, suspension from rank, or if it was serious enough, a block, depending on how big of an offence it was. Similarly, admins that don't compromise especially if a large amount of users ask for something like that, they can face a hefty fine. 5. Admins and burecrats who fail to notify their respective communities of upcoming changes or something that would impact them, will face a serious fine, or should they spring it on them, will face a suspension from rank.

Now how can Staff do this? Well, unless its a burecrat, which needs Staff authorization to remove their admin rights, all they need to do is simply my suggestions into the TOU. The trial of admins who have commited offences will be handled by The Admin Regulation Board, or TARB. Its a collection of users, usually admins and Wikia Stars with excellent records, that trial and convict admins that are found guilty of what I stated above. They can also undo an admin block on a user if it was determined that it violated the above recommendations. Their power will give them the ability to fine admins with a number of days that they cannot be on a wiki with their powers. In other words, admins who are fined can still be on their wiki, but they are forbidden from using their powers. Suspensions is where the admin's power for a certain number of weeks, if not months. In the event the admin has commited a number of violations repeatedly, that admin can either be blocked, or removed from office and not be allowed to hold it adminship in the rest of Wikia. The admins retain the majority of their powers, but these reforms make it clear that they cant just hand out a sentence, especially if its unfair, and just walk away. In order to keep adminship in line with Wikia, I urge you to implement my offer. Thanks. 