Board Thread:Wiki Discussion/@comment-5632187-20141023222048/@comment-25173123-20141025022754

Cosmicsilver wrote: I'm getting the feeling that the entire point of this post was missed.



If you would like to begin discussions about a thought process to use when going about deciding whether or not to use the "undo" button, feel free, but that isn't the topic being discussed here. The topic being discussed here is policies to be followed when a potential edit war is going to spark.

Cos I know you are trying to be progressive on the Wikia. But your forum posts are leaving a lot to be desired. You seem to be wanting to get a lot done in a little time maybe? And that is coming through in your lead ins?

You appear to be possibly wanting to discuss issues but are giving us yea or nay vote option in another post (no point of variance, though later we came to a medium), and in this you set down draft rules when a more communicative process would have been to describe the "edit war" situation and request discussion on the issue and how to help prevent it? Instead of the 'here is what we are doing and this is a draft of what it looks like' and your words themselves "Simply making policy to be followed that we don't have." once that portion is fixed you might get less of a reaction from myself, Zelron and possibly others on the situation?

At no place did I say "my way or the highway". What I said was if you are going dictate to us then I am going to find a place where they don't. And as you already mentioned I didn't offer any resolution because the point I was bringing was that you have already dictated the rules and that is the issue I had with your post.

But in the last part of your statement above you say basically that how to use the "undo" button is not the issue and I should discuss that in another discussion. When that is exactly the issue... as it is what is feeding the "edit wars".

If your entire point was being missed then maybe that is not so much us the readers but the author? You have the proper goal in mind I am sure but your delivery has a lot to be desired.

@Matsczon - sorry it came out that I was attacking you. It just so happens that your "undo" came directly after the rules came down and felt like it was almost intentionally done, though I am sure now that it wasn't. And it was in mere moments after my putting the info onto the page and no reply was seen by you on the subject. You had simply pushed a button that already had pressure on it. I don't mind rewording of the information in the least but I see that was not even the intention of your "undo" at that moment.

@VOLKNUR - it appears you have the basis for my concern and it was and still is a heavy concern. The latter reply with my edit, that was immediately felt by the rules being dropped, was simply characteristic of the issues an editor goes through when someone dismisses his edits... which is exactly what an "undo" is. Though your thoughts were on it being for grammer when it was mentioned it was theory alone.

Lastly, I don't see any of the process being a bad thing. What I do see is that improper presentation of said process shows an area in communicative presentation that needs greater attention before being put in front of us. I am one that can often lose some direction when communicating too, and surely "never say/write the perfect thing 100% of the time." But I am also not in Admin position where presentation is more paramount when communicating to others from a position of authority.