Board Thread:Support Requests - Community Management/@comment-25302371-20160202012041/@comment-1807002-20160202060501

I myself am a stricter admin (but I usually always conform to a founder's wishes or general consensus), so I know how it feels. I want to fix everything as soon as I see it wrong and have a hard time waiting to see if User's will correct it (properly) themselves, I am a bit OCD that way. And I get a bit cheesed when I fix something and get flaming aggro - no matter how much cause and policies I link them. But I would suggest more open communication on nerffing and consensus compromising.

Utilizing Consensus and giving Users a time frame to fix it themselves or ask for a community vote (use a poll maybe) on certain overpowerness. Or before nerffing get a second admins opinion first. If the User wants to fight it (civilly), take the time for consensus or compromising and they see more people not just admins don't agree with them they may step down on it more graciously (mind you some people never do).

Then you have back up: either the community or at least 2 admins thought 'this was overpowered and please adjust in the next couple days to week or an admin will do it for you to conform with this wikis new policies'... type thing. And that you may want to put your foot down on incivility (but get all the admins on board with that you'll need to come together on decisions if you do temp bans).

Dragon Age Wiki has some great policies on both consensus and incivility. You may want to adopt something similar.