Thread:KevinVolkov/@comment-25583733-20190803163703/@comment-38078079-20190821121724

I can't speak for how users are treated on larger wikis, but - I'd imagine - it'd be similar to any other platform that serves to act as a base for smaller communities, like say Tumblr or Facebook, in that soom are ran brilliantly and some are less so, but. . . I do fully agree on misunderstandings being common and can lead to issues for people who speak out.

I noticed today an admin snapping at someone for asking the same question, which has been asked dozens of times by other users, and - as they pointed out in their apology - there is an issue with Help pages being hard to find and often not very clear (which links into one of my complaints about Rules not being clear or accessible, and - when I sent this as con-crit via the support form and forum - was just told essentially 'you don't need to know the rules, just listen to admins' or 'it should be clear from the incredibly vague wording of x statement what we meant').

I find criticism of the system is what tends to get ignored, although - while I do also have some grips about individuals - I found those tend to be treated more receptively and often the people in question welcome feedback, too. It's just this weird thing where the system as a whole seems above reproach, and a lot of the time I do also feel there's no point making complaints or con-crit, as I'll just be shrugged off. It's hard to gauge how many other users have similar issues.

And that is true on the work behind wikis, too!

It's not something I ever thought about when I was just a reader, but - as an editor - it can take hours upon hours to make an article complete, check references, and properly format and add links and images etc., and it does make me respect others a lot for their work. I was using one the other day for a game walkthrough, and the sheer effort is astounding and I can fully see why staff often use it as an example of a 'good' wiki. It was admirable work indeed :)