Board Thread:Internal management/@comment-7091122-20161030211121/@comment-26988423-20161031022554

Camwood777 wrote:

Point 1: Umm, I don't get your point. It's called the discord of the PvZW for a wiki, you know. It isn't COMPLETELY independent. However, it is independent to a certain extent, so that's why we used unofficiality as a reason for both, simply because since they are partially independent, there is no reason to just keep one.
 * We can vote to delete the Discord chat as we know it on the wiki, despite it's unofficial rank.
 * Jack5Ninja has the full ability to shut down the Discord chat as we know it officially in case a vote like that succeeded. Why would he be given that power if it was unofficial?
 * We can also vote to delete the Lawn in favor of Discord, but that is also opposed because Discord is unofficial. Can't rid Discord, but can't rid the Lawn, for the same reasons? Why?
 * A report thread for SnappyDragon was made, and he was demoted on the Discord, but not on the Wiki Chat itself. If it's unofficial, how was he able to have this split?
 * Various votes or discussions related to "official" wiki content, be it a user's staff positions or removing the Lawn "official" chat, have been decided by the Discord being "unofficial". Again, if it's unofficial, how come it's allowed to have impact on voting for "official" stuff?
 * Several users have quit or gone inactive because of Discord drama. Despite this, this is shrugged off because it's "unofficial." However, when drama occurred in the Lawn chat, it was given full attention. Since both of them are chats, why are they given such differing treatment?
 * Heck, it's only sometimes it gets ignored. Why? Sometimes it gets noticed, like with Specialedition12, where once having a Discord-related outburst, he was hit with a warning. If it's okay to shrug it off because it's "unofficial", why was Specialedition12 given such (ahem) special treatment here?

Point 2: Umm, he was only able to have this split because it was unofficial. Wonderful contradiction made.

Point 3: Umm..... I believe it's not supposed to have impact, hence the oppose. If the proposal is because of discord, well it follows that people will oppose for the reason that Discord is unofficial. I don't see a problem here either.

Point 4: I need an example for this. I seriously don't get it. Judging from what you are trying to say, this looks like a problem we need to fix.

Point 4-sub: "outburst". That's a bit (re: a LOT) of an understatement. an OUTBURST? We need a stronger word.