Board Thread:Wiki Discussion/@comment-5264386-20140810061848/@comment-5632187-20140811151924

Billy, if you trust the current Mods, Admins, and Bureacrats to make all the decisions for you, wouldn't you also trust them to be able to tell when a vote being brought up is due simply to popularity and not to trustworthiness.

Going on from that, when I say that we're simply having votes with reasoning, part of your reasoning for voting in opposition can be past experiences you've had with this user, so your entire point about that is invalid. The reason I was saying not to allow someone to reply to another users vote is because it leads to bickering amongst users every time. Furthermore, replying to someone's vote will rarely, if ever, change someone's mind about what they said. Let's face it, humans are stubborn and don't like to be wrong.

It's my opinion that the current system of decisions IS broken, as we either just have the Mods, Admins, and Bureaucrats make the decisions(I personally don't like that at all) or we put up a discussion topic where the whole thing goes over the place and nothing is ever really solved or concluded from all the rambling. This is why I'm in favor of a consensus system for at least a few decisions on the wiki, so that the community can finally have an actual say in what goes on.