Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-74.14.41.165-20150824173506/@comment-1038387-20150824181313

Like I told you last time, send it to Special:Contact/feedback.

There are multiple flaws in this, that would lead me to not support this. But that doesn't matter, because this wouldn't be implemented on popularity alone.


 * The premise - "biased admins" - is itself biased.
 * This is all an attempt to give subjective matters an air of objectivity. No clear defintion of what is a good admin. Some quantifiable measures, but for the most part, you fail to provide a good judging system for what makes a "good admin". This sentence in particular: "known to be fair and just"... known by whom? Wikia is so large, that "great" admins can live a life completely parallel to eachother. I've encountered many great users here on CC, but I wouldn't know what else they're doing on Wikia. The only people that know them are likely "coworkers" or friends... which leads to bias.
 * Admins can ban for any reason they see fit, including no reason, and don't have to give a warning. It's better if they do, but it's not needed. They can also ignore requests if they don't want to explain.
 * These punishments reek of overregulation. In the past, Wikia has mentioned they don't want that. The power lies in the community, and that community decides. Not one individual who got himself blocked and isn't happy about it.