Board Thread:Administrative/@comment-867021-20121206144439/@comment-100066-20121209223245

I am fine with a formal grievance policy, but do you feel that it will solve these issues? As far as I know, Wikia is pretty hands-off when it comes to site admins and how they handle internal disputes. That means we would have to be appealing to our fellow admins. We could appoint a "leader" or "judge", but then they have too much power and could enact arbitrary decisions. With no leader, we are back to general consensus as a decision maker.

Demotion is a powerful incentive tool and I think that is why we are reluctant to make people into admins. Once they are there, it (has been) hard to remove them. But even if it is technically easy to revoke their powers, it reflects poorly on us if we promote someone to power before we really see how well they handle basic responsibilities and then have to revoke it later.

I can't speak for Nathan, but I don't imagine that his use of "soured relationship" means that we aren't all holding hands and singing Kumbaya together. A soured relationship, as I have seen it, is when dialogue between admins breaks down and they start working at cross purposes against each other. True, we won't see every issue the same and we shouldn't feel like we have to. But our disagreements need to be worked through behind the scenes until we get to a place where we can move forward again.

I never mean for consensus to be a feel-good term. In my mind, consensus is not everyone saying "This is perfect" but instead, everyone saying "I'm okay with that". It isn't perfect or flawless. It doesn't meet every aspect of everyone's desire. It is the art of compromise, the give-and-take of the different people/personalities/walks of life that truly do make the world interesting. I'm very glad that we see life in different ways and have different passions, otherwise this site would only have pages dedicated to Longshot (my favorite character).