Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-9531161-20140217041620/@comment-9531161-20140217075748

I don't think so. I think it's better to be at a standstill and getting along than to be hurtling through advancement in a whirlwind of temper. I REALLY think the most important thing to do right now is get along. Seriously, who cares about making the wiki a "better place" when the admins are sitting around fighting, making it 10 times worse? What do you want?

Having a majority vote may get more things changed (not done), but it'll split us up. What are you all (all the admins) trying to accomplish here? Are you trying to make the wiki a better place? Or are you trying to impose your own vision of the wiki on everyone else? If you want to make the wiki a better place, then the fighting has to stop. Look Brian, you're already dreaming up scenarios which put your fellow admins in a bad light. How are we supposed to get along when you all have this attitude towards each other? I'm not saying everyone needs to think the change is a good idea, I'm saying we need to accept the change. I guess "agree" is too strong a word. We'll have to have negotiations, and compromises will have to be made. If someone (anyone) is too stubborn to agree on anything, then obviously their chemistry isn't right with the other admins, and we'll need to find a new one. I'm not saying that if you disagree you're out, I'm just saying if you're going to be a dick, then you don't need to be an admin (not you, just in general).

That's why I think this group approval thing is what we should do. We'll get to see how people really are when faced with a tough decision. If they're going to be selfish and always try to get things their way, then they're not willing to get along and we need somebody new. It's harsh, but we need to get along.

These rules are far less vague than before, by the way. These rules deal in absolutes... how less vague can you get?