The bug is still a problem and has not been resolved yet. I still can't do anything on my message wall on the Avatar Wiki. The folks I contacted about the bug said that if I am still seeking some sort of block appeal or whatever, they advised me to just come to Community Central or something in their last reply to me. This is what they told me I should do, is that a fair arrangement?
Well I'm here based on advice I was given from the folks addressing this bug problem, and given my exile from the Wiki, I don't know what other alternatives to explore at the moment. I always assumed that this sort of thing ought to remain private.
You said the point of such a block is to do it "publicly and transparently". If it was done on someplace as public as Avatar Wiki, wouldn't that be meeting that criteria? Sorry, but I am a bit confused as to what it is you're saying it should be.
I would like to, considering the bug is still present in the system and keeping me out of my message wall there.
I said "the point of appealing one's block is to do it publicly and transparently". What I mean is that the appeal should be done on AW: publicly and transparently. Therefore, you should wait until the bug is fixed so you can appeal there. But if you insist, do it here.
Okay, still no change in the system, so I'm gonna go ahead and attempt to appeal here.
Okay, I concede the fact that I was pursuing the same discussion on the wiki just a little too much, and that I probably did get very pushy about it and was way too eager to keep coming back to it. Dunno why I've felt the compulsion to keep doing that, but yes I admit that I carried it too far for too long. And in doing so I probably came off as excessively negative. Perhaps that too was not for the better.
But a few things I want to say, I was not looking to personally attack anybody. And neither did I result to name-calling or any low-brow moves of that sort aimed at belittling anyone. I've been maybe too harsh a critic who's been too eager to push my critiques which I have reitereated on numerous occasions, and that was wrong of me. Also, at the time the block was enacted, I was provoked by another user. At that moment that it happened, someone tried to bash me and another user for being fans of the comics whilst also hammering our criticisms of the new series. And I admit, I shouldn't have reacted with the anger I did, but I was trying to defend myself and a fellow user from someone who came at us with a charged rhetoric. Said user who used this rhetoric against us quickly became inactive again on the site which personally I find kind of suspicious, but that doesn't matter. I was merely acting out of defense of myself and a fellow user at that moment, and yeah I didn't do so responsibly and probably should've said nothing and ignored it. I felt provoked at that moment as the reply was very harsh in tone towards the two of us.
I have been a vocal critic of the series and I admit lately my conduct had been especially bad simply because I kept forcing the argument open again too many times. Not sure why I felt compelled to do that and realize now that I went too far with it. But again, I wasn't personally attacking anybody, had no desire to, and if I was not courteous in introducing my own more critical perspective to the conversations that were ongoing, I apologize for it and will refrain from any further such tone and not react with the charged fervor I have at times. I realize it was ridiculous to keep doing what I was doing and even I was wearing myself out by doing so. I shall refrain from such conduct in the future and wish not to come across as disruptive again.
Fire Eater wrote:
Also, at the time the block was enacted, I was provoked by another user. At that moment that it happened, someone tried to bash me and another user for being fans of the comics whilst also hammering our criticisms of the new series.
You weren't attacked or provoked. That's the exact kind of rationale that led to the other two blocks: you don't accept to be contradicted and dress up third party criticism as "attacks". Everyone must accept your opinions as "facts" but everyone else's opinions are provocations or attacks. You have no self-restraint or self-control. You must always respond to what you perceive as "attacks" and ignite a flame war. This is why you were warned ad nauseam by admins and regular users.
Fire Eater wrote:
I shall refrain from such conduct in the future and wish not to come across as disruptive again.
You see how I have a hard time in believing you, seeing as you promised that last time you were blocked... and I don't think I have to reiterate how many times you broke your word.
Okay look, fine my opinions aren't facts. Fine then. And I was wrong to keep acting like they were. But no, that user I speak of spoke to me aggressively, I swear I am not making that up. And it was also aimed at another user. And I could prove it to you if the thread hadn't already been deleted several days ago. But this guy did openly bash us on something we did like, and his rhetoric in that moment was far more aggressive than what I had been using at that time.
What do I have to do to convince you of my sincerity? You've left me very few venues by which I might be able to do so, so I ask you how I can convince you of it?
You don't need to prove or convince me of anything. Here's the so called provocation:
@ Pheonixking3000: You're almost as bad as FE. I've seen everything you've complained about in Korra, most of it is nitpicking. "Oh how can aang be overpowered by a bender when they stated that the avatar can't", that kind of thing is annoying. There are some legit cirticisms with the show, but you and FE are going overboard. Every little detail you decide to take it out of proportion and use it against TLOK. As for you FE, if you hate the show, stop coming here. You're borderlining of being a class a troll with everything you say. You cirticize something people like and bash people for their opinions and say that book 1 isn't cannon yet when someone says that something that you like such as the comics are trash and aren't cannon, you pull the victim. It's annoying, and you really need to stop if you want people to treat you better. "How can a show this bad be so popular?", I don't know? Maybe it's because unlike you, people don't really cling to nostalgia so they don't go overboard with their hate. People who didn't like the show aren't like you, they say what they didn't like and don't attack those who do. Ever since the show began you hated it with the modernization. It's in the future, it happens. Don't pull the "Oh its avatar, its nothing like real life". Modernization applies everywhere, regardeless of the world. I know you are one of those people who would complain still if korra's world didn't advance. Or, if this was book 4, and the world was like this, you wouldn't care. This whole nostalgia thing is apparent seeing as you actually like the comics, which are trash and no where near as good as LOK, FACT. They've destroyed well established characters, the humor isn't even there, nothing like Bryke's humour. The characters are really out of character, and they've destroyed Zuko's character. I don't see how you like that abomination.
He mentioned the comics twice and in neither occasions did he "bash [you] and another user for being fans of the comics". He said:
when someone criticizes what you like, you act out. Check.
he doesn't like the comics. His opinion; not an attack.
He told you only what 100 user told you 10,000 times before: "if you don't like LOK, leave, because your behavior is borderline trollish". I had told you the exact same thing four days before!
So, no. You don't get to blame this on someone else. You're not some innocent victim who got tricked into being banned. You were banned because you used up your last chance. Within the span of four days since my last, last warning, you were involved in at least five arguments: one in which Lady Lostris had to intervene, one in which PSU intervened, one that PSU ended up deleting, one where Water Spout called you out, and the one that led to the current block.
You brought these situations upon yourself and I wouldn't be doing my job as an admin if I didn't effectively put an end to this. You don't like LoK. Great. I think even Bryke knows that by now, but we're kindly sick of the bickering and disharmony that comes from your need to bash the show. Learn how to curb your anger, find something that you do like, instead of letting something you obviously hate consume you and take the fun out of the show and the wiki for everyone, and more importantly learn how to keep unsolicited opinions to yourself.
Look, you hear him talking about his opinion like it's fact, so what makes him less guilty Thailog? What does he get off easy and scot-free just because he was a brand new user? If I'm guilty of talking like my opinions were fact which I just apologized for mind you, then why isn't he guilty? Notice the bold "FACT" he used?
And that's even more bullish language and tone he was using than I was up to the point he decided to launch that barage on me and Phoenix.
I will ask again, what do I have to do to convince you of my sincerity? You know, if I were to talk on Avatar Wiki right now, I assure you I would NOT go off looking for a fresh argument akin to any of those that you speak of. You may not believe me, but I'm telling you I would not do so. I can temper myself, I really can. It's not beyond my current capacity to do so.
And what I want to know is why this user, Avatarpopo, gets off guilt-free when he in at least one instance in that passage DID state his opinion as fact in attacking me for liking the comics, and I'm the only one getting reprimanded for it. He's not less guilty just because he did it once compared to me. Doesn't matter how many times you do it, it's the same offense if you did it 500 or 1 time. And again, he attacked another user, negatively comparing him to me when that user Phoenix had done absolutely nothing wrong, there's an innocent victim in this. He sniped at Phoenix as he sniped at me.
I hope you're not letting this guy get off the hook just because you guys are more eager to see me disappear for daring to criticize the series. I just fully admitted that my conduct sucked and fessed up to it and swore I would temper myself. YOU HAVE MY WORD.
Fire Eater wrote:
Look, you hear him talking about his opinion like it's fact, so what makes him less guilty Thailog? What does he get off easy and scot-free just because he was a brand new user?
Well, you tell me: were you reprimanded on the first time you "talked about your opinion like it's a fact"? And please tell me that you know this was not why you blocked. Otherwise, this is the end of this conversation for me.
Fire Eater wrote:
because you guys are more eager to see me disappear for daring to criticize the series.
You're seriously going to play the victim now and pin it on prejudice? Newsflash: no one cares about what you think! It just so happens that everyone is sick of reading your rants every chance you get.
You can shoot in every direction if it soothes your conscience, but you can't say you weren't warned ad nauseam. I can't think of any other user who got these many warnings from both admins, rollbacks and regular users. Not anyone who didn't end up permanently blocked, that is.
Fire Eater wrote:
You know, if I were to talk on Avatar Wiki right now, I assure you I would NOT go off looking for a fresh argument akin to any of those that you speak of. You may not believe me, but I'm telling you I would not do so. I can temper myself, I really can. It's not beyond my current capacity to do so.
I just fully admitted that my conduct sucked and fessed up to it and swore I would temper myself. YOU HAVE MY WORD.
This is not how it works. You get to prove that you can temper yourself before your third block and after the ridiculous amount of warnings you received. Now it's too late.
Doesn't matter when it happened either. You hear the tone at which this guy spoke? Let's not lie to ourselves here, what he said in that statement is no more innocent than what you've convicted me of at this time. He spoke aggressively, he verbally bashed me and Phoenix simultaneously, and even if you guys hate me immensely, as an admin you tell me, is it right for him to negatively compare one user to another in criticizing someone? How is that not an attack, man? Even if I am a guilty party, you're just going to excuse him for attacking Phoenix? How do you just excuse that? I know you probably hate me, but you're not going to acknowledge that he was also saying some nasty things to Phoenix as well?
I know you don't care what I think, but I think it's clear that that guys comment was provocative in tone and nature, to me and ANOTHER person. And come on, I know everybody there hates me, I'm sure all of you do. And maybe I deserve it. But I am forced to wonder how you can excuse Avatarpopo for a similar offense and yet so eager to can me for it, and if you're not going to reprimand him for what he said to me, then reprimand him for what he said to Phoenix.
Who said I was in denial of that? I never implied that. But I just apologized, darn it. I fully admitted my recent conduct sucked.
Well that doesn't work either unless you give me a chance to prove it. I would not go seeking out an argument on there right now if I were on the Wiki again right now, I swear to God I would not. But whatever, I know the hatred for me on that site is probably very widespread. You have no idea how upset I am that things blew up like that, or how exhausted I am from that whole debacle.
Again, how do I prove to you my sincerity? How? I want to know how. How?
Once again, you did not answer my question at the end. I won't forget that the next time I try to negotiate with you. So instead of stringing me on like this, why don't you just tell me next time you have no interest in hearing my appeal? Wouldn't that have made things move quicker?
Idle??? Dude, I apologized and I was being sincere about it. If you don't believe me, well that's your own decision not to have believed me, but you underestimated my willingness to comply again with the rules.
For the record, if you guys just plan on axing comments on the pages anyway, well then what is the problem? I handle better on my own message boards anyway. Why is that feature even being removed from the larger site anyway? Dozens of people still use it.
I did answer your question, it just so happened it's not an answer you like.
After everything I've put up with, you have the nerve to say I had no interest in hearing your appeal? I suppose that's why I sent Wikia a ticket to look into your Wall bug (when that was your problem, not mine)--because I had no interest in your appeal. If that was the case, I would have just ignored you and reported you for harassment.
I think you have our roles twisted. The AW community does not function like a pre-school in which when someone (a toddler) misbehaves, he is warned (by the teacher) time and time again but keeps crossing the line, either because he doesn't take the warnings seriously or because he wants to see how far he can break the rules, and when he is finally punished, he apologizes with teary eyes and promises to behave from there on in, if the teacher forgives him just this once. No, the AW is not like that. On the AW (and I assume any other professional wiki), when someone breaks the rules, a warning ensues. When that warning(s) have no deterrent effect, a block follows. You got plenty of warnings, then a block. You came back, fell back into the same behavior, again plenty of warnings, then another block. You came back again, same behavior, plenty of warnings and another block. Now you're apologizing as if you had offended or disrespected me. You didn't. You broke the rules continuously and failed to heed multiple warnings. This is why you are blocked.
Appealing to a block is not saying you are sorry and promising to be good if we only give you a 30th chance. Appealing means explaining why you think your block is unfair. That's why a last warning is called "last" warning. Two wrongs don't make a right, so whether or not someone else's behavior was incorrect, that is completely irrelevant to your appeal as it does not excuse your contravention of policy. And I'll repeat again, you were involved in five arguments since my last warning.
As for the comments proposal, read it, as you clearly are jumping to conclusions without knowing what you're talking about. And I'm not going to discuss this here either. That's for the AW.
Hey, I'm an adult man, whether or not you think so. What I'm thinking and saying you can interpret it however you want, but you're on one side of the net and I'm on the other, and I know better about what's coming from my side, not everybody else interpreting it from the other.
I am saying I'm sorry, and you're just looking past it, just like you looked past what Avatarpopo did. Fine, his offense was not a repeat offense, but hey, did that sound anymore civil? Take a good second look next time before you pin 100% blame on one guy for an incident involving other parties. That said, I take responsibility for all of my other related actions, even if you refuse to hear it out. I take responsibility. Stupid argument was not worth revisiting so many times, I realize that now. Hell, you guys are looking to axe those comments on every page. Well good. Too bad I didn't know about it a week ago.
And I took responsibility for said five arguments. You hear me? ALL OF THEM. They were not worth revisiting, it was repetitive crap. Should've saved myself the grief.
You want to do away with those and stick to message boards, is that not the crux of it?
Well, I wasn't given much reason to believe that you did believe me, to be quite fair. At no point up until now did it sound like you thought there was any sincerity in my attempts to apologize, as much as I was trying to emphasize that I was honest in my regret for having pursued that discussion in the five times you said I did.
Well that may be the case, I had no idea. I don't know every detail of Wikia policy, but in the midst of appealing it naturally came out. Was trying to show that I was in fact regretful of some of my past actions.
I know it means absolutely nothing, but sorry. I'm sorry for the debacle on the Avatar Wiki last month. I don't want to fight with anyone anymore. I'm done fighting. I just want to get along with people.
Just passing through, and that's all I have to say.
Okay, I need to address a serious concern on the Avatar Wikis.
Lately I feel that talk there, the ability to talk, is being extremely restricted. This has nothing to do with my block, I mean in general. I mean the main Avatar Wiki did away with the comments section which I guess was under debate for a while. And on Avatar Answers they're telling people not to hold chats, which I only started seeing today and was at a loss as to why.
So my question is, why? Why is conversation being so restricted? Yes, they're not social networking sites.......But people are allowed to post forums for discussion and up until recently they could comment. So what is being accomplished by all of this? Even when the chats are still relevant to Avatar, of which 90% or more of them usually are?
This is a serious concern, what is this all aimed at accomplishing?
There is a difference between talking on a forum now and again and doing nothing else than talking to a forum. What is being accomplished is that we are putting the emphasis back on what truly matters: editing. The commenting is third rang in importance on the AW or something.
As for the AAW: that's a question and answer wiki. Even less than the AW does it call for socializing -especially the kind that from users that use that wiki to circumvent their block on AW. Policies are policies and we are not wikis that cater primarily to talkers. If said talkers have issues with that, then I'm sorry, but our goal is to become an encyclopedia through editing, not talking, so the comments will not be brought back just to cater for the talkers.
Well with all due respect, people had been allowed to talk for this long without fear of such strict discipline. And as much as it's an encyclopedia, it's a forum for the fandom, and one of the fandom's primary online locales. I think that by limiting it to the degree that it has been, you take away a part of what it is, not to mention seriously clamping on the right these users otherwise should have to speak, forcing them to rely on stuff like EmailUser or IRC which are cumbersome and such. I think it could drive away users if it goes too much further, these rules are becoming difficult to bear with. It's not just an encyclopedia. No, it may not be a social networking site, but you can't separate socializing and talking. Talking IS socializing, and vice versa.
Are we prohibiting people from talking? No. They can just take it to the forums and talk there. Yes, the comments are gone, but people can still talk.
Fire Eater wrote:
And as much as it's an encyclopedia, it's a forum for the fandom, and one of the fandom's primary online locales.
No, we are not. I understand how commenters would like to think that, but we are not that. Being a forum for the fandom is a side occurance, but in no way is it a goal. The encyclopedic goal does and will always come first. The fact that part of the fandom also converses there is good for them, but that on itself is not a goal and especially not on the same level of importance as the editing.
Fire Eater wrote:
I think that by limiting it to the degree that it has been, you take away a part of what it is, not to mention seriously clamping on the right these users otherwise should have to speak, forcing them to rely on stuff like EmailUser or IRC which are cumbersome and such.
Again, no. By disabling the comments, we are not taking away part of what it is. By disabling the comments, we are focusing on what the AW is, namely an encyclopedia. And really, for the last time: people are not restricted in their ability to speak and converse with each other. They can still do so on the forums. As such, they are not restricted to mail and IRC, they have the forums. If people are going to complain about stuff, they should at least get their facts right.
Fire Eater wrote:
I think it could drive away users if it goes too much further, these rules are becoming difficult to bear with. It's not just an encyclopedia. No, it may not be a social networking site, but you can't separate socializing and talking. Talking IS socializing, and vice versa.
We can prioritize and that is exactly what we've been doing. And the people we might turn away with this are people that solely comment and do not want to use the forums. So no offense, but those are people that are virtually useless to our main encyclopedic goal, so the wiki is not affected in the least by hypothetically losing those people.
Well have you asked these fans what they think about what you're doing? Sorry, but the Avatar Wiki is as much a forum of the fandom as it is an encyclopedia, and it always has been. And why that's suddenly such a huge deal now is a mystery to me. It wasn't for the past several years, so where was it decided in the past year that it's a serious problem?
Well how do I know the forums won't get axed someday? I'm forced to wonder if they eventually will be since it's gone this far, and not every wiki has done what this wiki is doing. If you axe the forums someday, your site traffic will taper off quite a bit, if you limit it to only editing someday, then when there's little to no editing to be done, the site will fall into disuse during those time periods. Think the dry spell we had between the two series or even between ATLA and the movie. Wasn't much to do back then other than converse.
Nobody is useless, Lady Lostris. And I disagree with selective policy like that. Where you pick out the "useful" from the "useless", what happened to just rooting out trolling users who's only purpose is to stir up trouble? I think if this goes too far and God forbid the forums should ever come under fire later, this could backfire. Why all of this is such a huge problem now when it was not before this year is again baffling to me. I'm sorry but I must respectfully disagree with the extremity of this aim.
Every community member was free to join the discussion in the War Room and a visible link was posted on the recent wiki activity. If people didn't care to participate, then that's not my responsibility.
Just look at the archives on Avatar Wiki and you'll see that the comments and them being there has always been a big thing on the wiki, both with supporters of them, but also with many opposers. So your hypothesis that comments have always been liked and them being a big thing is just factually incorrect.
Please, if you want me to carry on a discussion with you, at least do me the courtesy of dropping the hypothetical drama. You don't know the forums won't get axed someday, just as you don't know that someday all the admins might decide to just delete every page on the wiki and then protect it so that no one else can restore it. Do you see the irrelevancy of speculating about such things, especially if you want to make a serious point? Also, "you're forced to wonder"? Come on... And yes, not every wiki has done what the AW has done. But also, not every wiki has democratically elected administrators as the AW has. Not every wiki allows so much community input as the AW does. Not every wiki is as organized as the AW is. Not every wiki is a lot of this, so what exactly is your point with your comparison?
Seriously... read my comment again. I never said that commenters on their own are useless. They are not useless as people. The are, however, undeniable useless to our wiki's goal of becoming a thorough encyclopedia, as they do not contribute anything substantial to our pages. So please, get your facts straight before you attack me on something that I didn't even say. So of course you disagree with me as you don't deigned yourself to look at our wiki's background and you didn't deign yourself to get your facts straight before complaining about something. You just see your side and you didn't care to find out the reasoning behind a measure taken.
Yeah well I've never seen such a big deal raised about them until this year, so forgive me for questioning why it suddenly is a big deal.
You're right I don't know, but I now have every reason to believe they'll someday come under fire and further tightened since apparently differentiating the wiki from the likes of Facebook is just becoming such a huge priority. These individual wikis have never operated in the same strict sense that the original Wikipedia does. There's a big difference. I don't see this anti-socialization thing being pushed everywhere else like it is here, so forgive me for having waved a red flag at it. And frankly, I will say that community input is now endangered on the AW. The fact that I have not seen this kind of thing on 90% of the other wikis I've visited makes this alarming to me. My point is straight out I don't like the idea of stifling talk on the AWs just because you have to differentiate it from something like Twitter, and most folks I think understand that it is not. Like it or not, these wikis are also places where fans of whatever's out there converge to talk side-by-side with their day-to-day editing and never have I seen it raise alarm on any other wiki. Why is Avatar such a special case in all of this?
You already are a thorough encyclopedia, this talk and stuff does not take away from your ability to provide accurate and objective data on the topics the wiki addresses, this talk has stripped AW of absolutely none of that. The talk and speculation continues but does not render anything on the wiki unreliable in providing the info people come for, it is not compromised in any way by the majority of the people who come. True, you gotta root out the folks who deliberately try to interfere with it, but the majority do not, and certainly not by having their talks separate from the data displayed in the articles you've showcased on the AW.
Describe it as you will, but this is a concern of the AW that I think is being played up a tad much. Besides, it's not like any of you guys in the administrative role have never had your own hand in such chats and comments, I've seen you guys do it before. In the end we're all just people on the same site.
You really are clueless as to what it means to be an editor, cause if you would know, you would never say that the overly socializing doesn't deter away from the encyclopedic goal. It does. Why do you think the comments were disabled last time with the airing of TLoK Book 1? Because the amount of useless commenting was completely pushing down the edits made, thus making it near impossible for the editors to work and verify the edits made.
So no, it's no concern that the AW has centralized commenting onto the forums. Btw, you want to know another fun fact? Wikia created the forums with the idea that they would one day replace all comments, that on all wikis the comments would be disabled in favor of the forums. We are thus just basically doing what they envisioned to happen with the function.
Of course we have our hands in comments now and again, but if you again would verify your facts before making hasty generalizations, you would also know that most of the administrative comments are to tell people like you to calm it down and stop instigating fights lest they'd be blocked. That is time utterly wasted for editors. So no, comments will likely not come back ever, and you'll see, the traffic of the AW will not suffer in the least. So your concern is really just your concern and just affects what you did on the wiki.
Well that makes sense to restrict them then, but you do not have to make it a permanent thing. That system worked for the time Book 1 was on, why not just reinstate them when Book 2 is done? You guys are not going to have much to do between Book 2 and 3, so what the heck else are you going to do on a site when you have an editing desert in your midst? When all the updates are done, what are you guys going to do? Let's be realistic here, editing will drop sharply when comes back those between-season breaks when you have relatively little to update, okay? Think about that for a few.
Huh. Did you ask anybody else if they share this vision? Wikia forbade anonymous users over the summer, isn't that enough for now? Not that all of them were troublesome, but it at least made sense to do that given the arguments made over age and how it was used as a shield by some for trolling and sockpuppetry. Didn't have to go that much further.
I am not making hasty generalizations, and I won't let that dispute distract us. I'm sure you dislike me because of past disputes on the wiki and I'm sorry for them, but I am not opening old wounds here. You can't pretend fans are not going to talk on a site where the show that is the focus of the fandom is the central highlight, you can't stop them from talking. And now this business on Avatar Answers Wiki, that's become a worst-case scenario with the building restrictions there. Nobody here is under the illusion that these wikis are like Twitter or Facebook, and so long as the talks had are relevant to what these wikis cover what the heck is the cause for alarm?
Wikia has always been free use and most people use it responsibly, but these recent preventative measures against the offenses of a relative minority, and out of this obsessive desire to separate Wikia from FB and the likes threatens the entire point of that. Nobody's using this wiki for any other purpose but discussing Avatar and stuff, so I wouldn't fix what isn't truly broken. I don't see what the deal is. You guys did away with anonymity among users, fine, you block comments on pages during the time these seasons air, fine. Those were reasonable measures, but some of these more recent ones aren't. These are making it exceedingly difficult for some of us who actually want to talk to each other to actually talk to each other.
You do realize that you are talking one of the most fervent editors of the AW, right? One of the users who never understood how people could start complaining that they had nothing to do now that no new content was released. There will always be things to do -for example, some of the ATLA transcripts aren't even in order yet and that show has ended ages ago. Besides, if you would look at the forum that led to the decision to disable commenting, you will see that Thailog listed a number of reasons for doing so. I care not to defend that solid decision with you here, since all you need to do is read the forum to be up to date with our reasoning.
Eum... it's a Wikia decision, so if they wanted that to happen, there is not a hell of a lot any of us can do -example as you noted: the anonymous editing. No one of us could stop that, and it definitely was not our decision to disable anonymous editing. So be peeved about that all you want, but don't ever blame the local administrators for that as they had nothing to do with that (in fact, every administrator on the AW was against disabling anonymous editing as you could see on the relevant threads about it if you cared to actually dig for facts as opposed to solely rely on your own opinion of us).
Oh. My. Bloody. Hell! How many times do I still have to tell you that I don't hate you. That no administrator on the AW hates. No one cares about what you did and what you thought, everyone was just extremely tired of your attitude and the consequences you always brought forward. That is why you were blocked, not because of some random personal vendetta that you seem to like more as a reason. I'm sure it's more cool to tell your friends that you got blocked based on "the administrators hate me" as opposed to "I screwed up and shot my own chances in the foot", but the latter would be the truth, the former just a gigantic lie.
And again, don't put words in my mouth that I didn't say: I don't pretend that fans are not going to talk on the AW. What I said is that catering to talking fans is not our #1 goal and priority. Being an encyclopedia is, and if thoughtless and random comments have to grouped elsewhere than on the bottom of a page so that the objective and professional look of our pages improves, then that is what we are going to do. Again, this reason was explained in the forum that led to the disabling of the comments that you obviously did not care to read thoroughly or even at all.
Bloody hell, you really don't ever want to know the reasoning behind things do you? Do you always blindly charge at people without knowing anything of the relevant background or knowing even the facts? As said above, none of the administrators could've done anything to prevent blocking anonymous editing and the ability to talk to one another has not been disabled, merely moved. All you ever did was comment on the TLoK page and the Korra page. You can still do that on a general TLoK board thread and a general Korra thread -which there are- so what is your problem? You can still talk and it is even made easier to follow the discussions you're in. What's the big deal then?
Anyway, you do have to know that even though I asked a lot of questions, they are all rhetorical, as I do not care to have any sort of discussion with you since you so flagrantly ignore facts and contexts and reasonings to cater for the own idea that you have formed of things in your head. You perceive your own thoughts as the absolute truth even though the actual evidence contradicts that. But that's your choice to do so, and as we all know, there is nothing anyone can do about that. So you have fun with that, I am done with this conversation. Have a good one.
I'm not really interested in reading them. I disapprove of this latest in a long string of overly restrictive moves and frankly, this tightening grip on the wiki means that I have little interest in returning to the site next year. My decided lack of interest in returning is attributable to many reasons, and this tightening control all over fear of this 'social network' business that very little widespread alarm was raised over prior to now is one major factor in that.
Well forgive me, but I was not aware of that in regards to the anonymous editing. I knew none of that. Besides, I'm not complaining about how that matter of business was handled.
I take offense at that. I don't deny my personal fault there, my attitude does suck a lot. And I've been trying to put a stop to that as of late because frankly, I'm no longer in a fighting spirit and I have no desire to fight with anyone else over something so petty. I don't like the show, I don't care about the show, so for the most part I've begun to ignore the show. Ignoring it has been better than fighting about it, this new show is no longer my concern. And not concerning myself with it has done me wonders in my time staying away from it. I'm rarely pursuing serious talk of it anymore anywhere else beyond general info of what's unfolding, then moving on with my usual business.
Doesn't matter to me anymore, I'm blocked. The wiki at present is useless to me. Besides, I don't like what it's becoming. It IS an encyclopedia, no need to be worrying about the need to make the distinction when it's already been made. But I'm disagreeable with some of the measures taken in enforcing it lately, so my business from now on is no longer on AW.
I don't know, maybe I just feel like it's become too difficult to have a discussion or debate there like we've always done since it's founding for fear that all of these new regulations will be used to tell us we're doing something wrong. It's not like everybody who's a regular user there is taking outside chats unrelated to Avatar subjects there now.
Just to clarify, I don't deny my attitude has been bad in the past, but I came here because part of me is still concerned about the severity of these new restrictions there, and how do I know they won't go further than they already have eventually?
Rhetorical or not, I am answering them anyway to get this matter of business out of the way. I'll just leave on the parting note that I don't like the implications for the user-friendly nature of AW under these growing restrictions and how do I know they won't be further tightened in the near future with them having gone this far? Few other wikis have gone to this length to distinguish an encyclopedia from a "social network". But because this one has, I have very little interest in coming back next year. Yeah, sure, it's just comments now, but what's next down the line? I don't even want to guess.
Hey, I KNOW my views are not "absolute truth", but this is how I perceive some of what's been going on lately. I disapprove of it, okay? I may not be able to raise any sort of objection that will be taken seriously, but I will still quietly disapprove of it from afar all the same.
We all know AW is an encyclopedia. The majority of us are not foolish enough to misidentify it as otherwise.
Yeah, I seriously doubt I'll be back next year. Not because of Korra, because I don't care much about that now. But because I don't think it's that much fun anymore.
A lot of people are beginning to voice dissatisfaction with the wikia's new policies, Lady Lostris. A lot of them just don't like the site anymore. If you guys really care that much about the wiki, you may want to address the matter because I don't think the larger crowd likes what's going on there. And I'm not making this up, I'm hearing a lot of disgruntled users in the past few weeks.
We care a lot and we see that the amount of visitors and the forum activity is at a very nice and desirable level, so I see no need to change back for the few who cannot adjust to the forums. We have no responsibility to cater for those who cannot find themselves in agreement with a community endorsed measure. Because mind you, it was a community decision, as no user -no matter their rights- has the authority on Avatar Wiki to make a decision of such scale -or not even of such scale, any decision really that affects the site- on their own. So I am very sorry, but the few complaints you heard from a handful of people do not outweigh the positive visitation statistics we are getting.
I do not. But do not be ignorant of the growing discontent that I am seeing. If it keeps growing, you may be forced to address it in the future, if not in the near future. Administrative decisions don't always work.
If it actually becomes a problem in the future, then the measure can always be reverted then if there would actually be some tangible proof of the discontent. The measure is not written in stone, but there is also no need to revert a truly beneficial measure based on some unproven predictions. And please, stop implying that the administrators run the Avatar Wiki as that is so far from the truth that you can't even see the truth anymore. As said before, Avatar Wiki is a completely community run wiki. As such, no administrator has the power to take any grand measures by themselves, no matter how much we might want to. Just like any other user are we bound by the community consensus, whether we like it or not. So for the last time, the administrators did not decide to remove the comments. Thailog suggested it as a user, not as an administrator, and the community supported him in his suggestion. It was not and never will be an administrative decision. The administrators are generally speaking just the people who carry out the decisions made by the community, but that does not mean that they actually made the decisions by themselves. Please try to remember that and stop saying that it is done otherwise as that is just a terribly wrong assumption.
If, and I do say if it ever becomes a problem, then anyone is free to start a War Room forum to gather community consensus to overthrow the previous decision and bring back the comments. Such is the democratic way of the Avatar Wiki.