Hey there, Cosmang! I know usually replies stays within the wiki it happened in; but my first attempt on calmingly point out some nuances was used as further example of how, in another's belief, I'm ill-suited. I have not claimed to be perfect, but if defending myself is just going to make me look guiltier in that one particular person's eyes; while I don't particularly care for it, I also don't particularly care to spend time on being ridiculed. So please bear with me with replying to you here. If it makes you uncomfortable or evokes other unpleasant feelings, I apologize in advance, and you are absolutely free to delete this.
I wasn't sure if there was actually a question in your reply, which is another reason I'm not directly responding in the same post. Were you asking why I for some reasons honed in on the fact the statement wasn't on my "bio"? And why whether or not the place the statement appeared in is called the "bio" is worth arguing over?
At first I thought there was a question, but the second part to me looks like you're telling me that, in the end, it doesn't matter. So I wasn't sure if you are interested to hear why I chose to respond, or was just simply noting that my response is irrelevant to you, and not needing another comment in response to your observation.
Let me know? lol Because if it's the latter, I'd hate to bother you if you aren't interested in hearing. xD
First of all, no need to apologize, secondly, my question was very much rhetorical. I wasn't asking for an answer per say, but rather to state my opinion: that whether it is called "I am" or "Bio" doesn't change anything. I also had no ill-intent with my comment, your argument about it not being called "bio" just confused me, that's all. I have to agree though with Marc, that your comment in your "bio/I am" wasn't very... welcoming, however I do agree with you that being welcoming/kind/*insert whatever good social trait there is* is needed to be content mod, or even just rollback. This does not mean however that I think of you to be the opposite of *good social trait*, not at all, and I don't want you thinking that. If you want to explain why you decided to write that, I'd definitely hear it, but tbh it really is up to you. Cheers, (Ugh message boards are so annoying) CosmicChronos
Oh phew! Now knowing that it was indeed closer to my latter interpretation, I'm really glad I didn't reply in the original thread bahaha lol. Sorry for the confusion (I won't deny, I do think I'm bad with words; it's a shortcoming I recognize and have been trying to improve.) (And no, I didn't think you had any ill-intent with the comment =D)
I agree 100% that what I wrote wasn't welcoming, and I said so as much in my reply; I know it is just a name (what where I wrote the statement was called), but I think "bio" is officially what one would want others to know them for; and while I don't mind people knowing I'm sick of certain somethings, I would definitely not want to be known as the someone who's sick of [...]; as in, I would have not put out the statement where it was, had it been labeled as "bio", and it was not on my end.
I think the intention is slightly different, even if it's minute; I feel like I was being told that what I wrote was not suitable to be put in a "bio", and I do actually agree with that; the problem is, I hadn't intended for it to be in a "bio", and it really was not, on my end. I hadn't really mind the first time when it was brought up, but it was said a second time, to me looking like emphasizing that is of great concern, and it could be, but I think it is somewhat misleading, and for people who're just reading the thread and may not actually click onto my User page to verify the statement, I very well may be known as someone who put something inappropriate on their "bio", and I don't think that's fair for me, especially because I did put thoughts into what I knew to be the actual "bio".
At that point I also feel my contributions within the community were completely disregarded, the actual part that should be measured when it comes to qualification was not touched upon, and for some bizarre reason, my personal liking was brought to the forefront and being discussed. I'm not the nicest person, but I didn't think the thread was the most relevant place for my character to be called into question, especially when, purposefully or not, the positive changes I made were left unsaid. I don't want to brag, because I think actions should speak louder than words, but if reading the thread alone, with the statement that has already been laced with personal interpretation, I think I've been cast in a negative light in a way that has little to do with the crux of the application. Hence the response, the least I can do was to point out I had not put it in a place that on my end is called a "bio," nor do I think my so-called lack-of-maturity would let me be incapable of properly deleting duplicates. I'm not saying they are "wrong" to think that, I'm saying "I disagree", if that makes any sense.
And... yeah... I'm horrible at expressing my thoughts. xP I'm not saying "I'm right" and am not trying to convince you to think that "I'm right" (because there is no right and wrong? there's just opinions,) but since the purpose of my response seemed unclear, I figured it wouldn't hurt (much) trying to explain the reason behind it. (well, I supposed I could be further proving the whole lack-of-maturity thing, but I guess I've accepted that lol.)
If you finish reading this, thanks for indulging me xD. (and I hope I haven't upset you with this longwinded reply)
Yeah, I understand. I also agree with you that your personal liking isn't exactly relevant to the conversation, however I do understand why Marc wasn't very "happy" (can't say I was either) about what you wrote, however I'm certain it wasn't your intention, so tbh it's fine. No worries :P
If it makes you feel any better (it probably won't D; but I figured I should still mention this;) that statement is actually a 3-year buildup of pent-up frustration explosion lol. It's more about the not-so-infrequent experiences of seeing people casually leaving comments about how small a wiki is and hoping it will be expanded etc., without actually trying to help out. Admins are important, sure, but without helpful editors, their spirits could eventually be easily crushed. No, not everyone is like that, but after seeing yet another innocent comment on a small wiki recently, again with the person not doing anything short of saying those stuff, I was annoyed (again.)
I'm really sorry that the statement is hurtful to you; there's a reason why I didn't namedrop anyone, because it really wasn't specifically about anyone, I just personally don't like the action (an action which in itself is super vague, and the word count limit just couldn't let me put out the whole thing.)
On a different note; I'm not sure how Seth calculated the votes prior to closing yours; but your blog analysis on HPW is super insightful (so insightful that I'm still digesting it lol,) initially I wasn't going to participate (I actually don't really care about Admin elections; I trust the current ones to make a decision that's best for the wiki,) but I have seen you making effort to help out, so I wouldn't have minded voting for (had I known the vote has started; still confused about that.)
Like I said, not sure where "5 users for and 4 against" came from, because rereading the thread, I'm actually getting "3 for and 1 against;" I think 2 of the commenters were illegible to vote either way, so I'm assuming my comment was probably counted as against, even though I have not explicitly said so. The comment was really about how I personally don't think the so-called reasons (brought up not by you) were concrete, I think you deserve a better defense but that was not it. (and maybe that's just me.)
I think if there's an Admin on HPW being just as active in the main wiki and the discussions, you will likely be that person, the first to achieve that. If I stick around long enough (I don't make promises I can't keep;) it'd be a pleasure of seeing that happen.
I don't feel angry or sad anymore about your statement, it was well defended and I feel like you have all the right to rant about users (just as I complain very often about small children on the discussions who do nothing but ask the same questions over and over), and I definitely understand why you made that statement.
As for the Blog, thanks! I hope more people will read it, I feel like Fandom pointed some very interesting stuff out, that we definitely could keep in mind. (I also really liked your template for the condensed spoilers. It's unfortunate it won't be used, imo it actually worked quite well)
For the vote, I'm fairly sure he counted himself and Ironyak1 against, but I don't feel angry or sad about that. I also don't regret closing the application myself... It didn't seem to be going anywhere, and I think I realized that to gain the trust of editors, becoming an admin wouldn't be enough, but rather I'd have to edit more. xD
Oh and yeah, I think it's inevitable I'll be that admin, I'm just too attached to the discussions and the wiki to leave it :P
If you need help, feel free to leave me a message; you may also want to visit the forums or join us on Chat. You can also check the staff blog to keep up-to-date with the latest news and events around FANDOM.