|Content posted on this page is to only be about improving the article itself.|
For all other types of discussion, please post them in the forums.
Hi, I see you have had a lot of drama recently. I've been asked to call in and try to settle a few points.
Firstly, I don't consider any of this to be a staff issue as such. I'm glad to help out, but it's going to have to be the community that calms things down and works together again.
On votes: there is no one perfect way of doing them, but a common way (and really the traditional way for wikis) is that there needs to be a consensus for any major change. That means "general agreement", and not just a straight count of the votes. On something like an admin vote, I would always like to see a strong agreement - not just a win by one or two votes. There really needs to be more enthusiasm than that for a new admin!
A blog asking for admin/bureaucrat resignations is also valid. That’s the way the community can express their unhappiness about admin decisions (after talking to the person in question to try and resolve issues first of course).
However, three votes in such a short time is not reasonable. You can’t keep having votes on the same thing until you get the result you want! I would expect significant time to pass before a demotion conversation was repeated - maybe even a year or more.
Overall, this is a good community but it needs these arguments to calm down and everyone to go back to improving the wiki. That's what we are here for after all.