Board Thread:Wiki General Discussion/@comment-33230496-20190612175352

Over the past few weeks I'm seeing tension on this Wiki, as well as several other Wikis. Predominantly, I see regular users having disagreements between staff, or those of higher ranking than them. Unfortunately, these disagreements are unconstructive to both users and staff, as they reach no concensus on how to improve a Wiki. Sure, some of these disagreements I've seen have reached compromises, but others don't - and they include users quarreling with staff. Here are several of my thoughts on these types of disagreements; they're long but very important.

For one, users may be disagreeing with how the staff rules, and the rules in general. But part of this is because the users just want to be bold in making good edits. They may not understand why certain rules exist from keeping them from making said edits. So, they bring it up to staff, feeling that the rules or themselves are not being fair. But staff may see the users' points in a different way. They tell the users their side of the points, which in turn is seen differently by the users. Eventually, the users and staff exhaust themselves from trying to get each other to understand their points.
 * If users want to be bold in editing on a Wiki, so be it; it can be revolutionary for said Wiki, as well as a huge advantage. But they must be cautious on how to make these "good-faith edits" happen. They don't want to be so sudden that it confuses staff. A good way on bringing these edits up is to bring it to staff first. The staff may consider these before telling users what they think about it, and may implement it in their Wiki. Understanding both sides and why they're that way is just a start. Reaching a compromise.

Here's another thing - when disagreements go awry, they go really bad. Next thing one knows, the disagreements turn into shouting insults, rants, mini-modding (more on that later), and even vandalism. None of these are not acceptable, as it breaks the bond between users and staff, further weakening Wikis. Wikis have to maintain a balance between different roles, so one is not overpowered or underpowered.
 * Nobody should act harsh or with an attitude towards others, and even staff should follow this. Acting rudely and uncivil just breaks the bonds, and it gives neither side an explaination why the disagreements are what they are. Instead, both sides should stay calm, civil and disciplined, even if they feel they want to rip out people’s guts. Throwing around accusations or insults is a lose-lose strategy, too Also remember: everyone is entitled to their own opinion, as long as they remain civil..
 * Even if one has a bad day, or is struggling with outside conflicts, they still need to "keep calm and stay positive". Nobody knows other people's personal lives that well, which is why users should probably mention theirs if they start acting grubby. The other side asking them if they have any problems is key to understanding why they act rudely - being too harsh and overgeneralizing just amps up the rudeness, rants, and more.

There's another harsh step users take, which is the act of mini-modding. (A brief summarization of it can be found here.) Outside this Wiki, I'm seeing users doing this technique a lot. But, there's a fine line between reminding someone of the rules and commanding them.
 * There's staff on every Wiki for a reason. Whether small or big, they are here to keep order, build up their Wiki and its community, and more. Meanwhile, they also have regular users - and that group is way bigger than the staff group itself. It's tough to manage the bigger group, trust me. That's why regular users tend to remind others breaking the rules to stop, in a friendly, kind, instructive way. On the flip side, there are a handful of regular users commanding others to stop, as well as instructing users dictatingly what to do.
 * First of all, some of the commands regular users tend to do aren't approved or confirmed by the staff that the commands are allowed. Second of all, mini-modding intimidates users, as they wonder why a user the exact ranking as them uses such demand over even the staff themselves. For these reasons, users should know their places; they must comply with staff, even if they disagree with them. In turn, staff should treak the bigger group with kindness, as if they really want users to stay on their Wiki. (Hello, sensitive people on the run.)

As I'm typing this, I know other staff members on this Wiki may find the statements I made unusual. They may even disagree with those statements. Therefore, they may speak out publicly about this. All of those are fine; eventually, we can reach compromises...without acting too immature.

Thank you. 