Thread:Sannse/@comment-1807002-20160401022418/@comment-1807002-20160404221347

Even Josephyr thought not letting consensus happen was poor practice. And that was why I came to your wall due to the fact poor admin practice and a community consensus rules above admins was in your blogs.

I could bend over backwards devising fixes, if that was consensus want, that isn't the problem, the problem was admins didn't allow consensus (a forum thread vote) which is I though what is a bad admin practice according to your blogs.

Josephyr wrote: Hey, so it seems to be a tricky situation. I genuinely understand both sides of the issue, but I wouldn't go as far to say it's an abuse of power. It seems that the admins are choosing to take the position of, "Fix it, make it work, forget consensus." It's not a great position, and I personally do not like the idea of such change without discussing it among the users of a wiki.

Oh and yeah, I don't blame you for choosing fun, if I could weekend from this stress and unfairness I would have, but even gone I feel we were mistreated and I feel worse that they let it get as far as editors leaving, I mean really? Was not allowing consensus worth that (and it sounds like they think it is - which again bad admin practice!)!

Ugh, sorry I am venting a bit, it just sounds like you just want to work around a bug (like the admins) instead of letting the community decide if it is worth working around at the cost of perma-ban on templates in infoboxes and templates within templates. There is 3/4 ways to edit with out the issue and banning is a handicap on all source editors/template users. It just sounds like you/the admins are appeasing a broken obsolete feature (that is even banned on some Wiki due to its bugs) at the cost of limiting template use without letting the community vote on it.