Board Thread:Support Requests - Community Management/@comment-24847478-20140627004110/@comment-452-20140627184432

It looks to me that your edits were in good faith, and that you've done the right thing with your communication with EyelessAndSlender. However, your final response in the thread probably didn't help.

EyelessAndSlender responses of "I'm not reading all of that." and "Know your place." say everything, really. It's good that CosimoValuta called EyelessAndSlender out on being wrong about the definition of sock puppetry, however, the remainder of the post is no better than EyelessAndSlender's. I think it's funny that they accuse you of having a "massive superority complex", when they obviously a quite high opinion of themselves.

The problem with many wikis is that the communities allow the admins to seize power by default by making all the rules, and enforcing them on everyone, but everyone forgets to make rules for admin conduct. Most admins are unlikely to introduce guidelines to limit their own power, because they want everyone to think that they are above the rules. Admins are just janitors. A rogue janitor can lock all the doors, but it doesn't mean that it is their right, their job. Any admin who sees their role as "police" or "ruler" instead of "janitor" should not be an admin.
 * Note: On the other hand, a few wikis have really good admin conduct policies, and make it perfectly clear that admins must always act in accordance to the rules.

Their policy of issuing blocks as punishment due to formatting problems is ridiculous. If the required formatting is complex, then it is a failure of the administration to either make it easy, or to make preload templates. Default layouts and template preloads exist for exactly this reason.
 * Note: I sometimes delete pages if the default layout instructions shown when creating a new page are ignored, but I've made it very easy to follow the default template, and my deletion messages always say "Article creation instructions were not followed - feel free to recreate and follow the instructions". But I would never block someone just for incorrect formatting or layout.

Unfortunately for everyone, there's no Wikia policy stating that admins are not allowed to be immature, irresponsible or incompetent. Even though the conduct of those two in that thread shows they are unfit to be admins, unless the majority of that wiki's community states that they want the admin removed, Wikia Staff will not intervene.

When your block expires, start a discussion on that wiki's forum proposing the creation of guidelines for admin conduct and new blocking policies - be polite and clear, definitely avoid all sarcasm and hyperbole. So long as your proposals are based on making the wiki easier to use, more welcoming, and fairer for everyone, everyone should agree with you.

If they delete the discussion, inform Wikia Staff, but I'm unsure whether Wikia Staff will do anything about an admin deleting a policy proposal. I can't find anything in the TOU or Wikia Community Guidelines which specifically forbids admins from deleting discussions they don't like, but Help:Common mistakes mentions "everyone has a hand in making decisions as a group" and "Wikias are owned by their communities" which is something that many admins seem to ignore. (See also the "Deleting useful content." section of that page, which is relevant to this situation.)

Edit: Even though their conduct was completely unprofessional and decidedly unpleasant, I can't see anything that they said that actually violates the Terms of Use. The uses of a "smartass", "annoyance", "illiteracy", "comedy crap", " someone who has as little training", would be against Community Central policy, but not Wikia-wide conduct guidelines.