Board Thread:Policies/@comment-10473115-20170415164119/@comment-4651179-20170417185806

I haven't been participating in many discussions this last month due to college and personal complications, but I have noticed as well a change in the enviroment of the wiki.

For the most part of my years contributing, I have felt the wiki is an example of a good online community. The admins and mods are capable of working with each other and with regular users, making a lot of new contributors feel welcome and helping them out figuring out the quirks of the site which can be a bit overwhelming for people barely getting started. It's good to see a site where the staff can interact so organically with new people, acting as leaders of the community rather than bosses.

On the surface, I can't really ask for more. However, most of the issues that have arisen in the atmosphere of the site stem from the interactions between the higher-ups (or users with special rights, or people with colored names, I don't know what to call us). The suits discussion escalated mainly due to misunderstandings that were lucky cleared up (this is my understanding of the situation), but other discussions have turned a bit turbulent simply due to the attitude of the main dissidents. There is no way to solve these problems other than to turn the page, let out grudges and keep assuming all users are editing here in good faith. It's not easy. I didn't use to do that, sometimes I slip up, but I try.

As for improving the decission-making process, as a bumpy as it was, I believe the Mister/Mr. discussion was ultimately a good start. A matter was brought up to the attention of the community, it was discussed, it was voted with a concise result, and it was implemented as a policy. Everbody acted accordingly for the most part. I don't believe time was wasted when in the end we could move from a norm being decided unilaterally and without and actual guideline to having a written policy established by a consensus.