Board Thread:Wiki management/@comment-5143323-20180113035227/@comment-24024415-20180114160242

So all my years of dedication, of constantly improving articles for literal years and debating on a many voting threads with other users, does all of that mean nothing now? What about users that have far longer and even greater aptitude than I, yet are still not in a position of power, or worse, don't want power prior to this change? Are they just duped too?

The greatest social asset of Wikia for me is it's collaborative efforts to supporting and creating both articles and changes for even the most minor of cases. Debate is something I genuinely love to do, even as someone who is so introverted that I have better time continuing a conversation than I do starting one. This wikia basically nurtured and evolved that interest singlehandedly. That's what kept me on to this wikia, even after massive burnout of PvZ2 and H after their content dried up and updates ceased in speed and quality. To discuss on changes granted me the ability to grow as a person, something I can only attribute to few other things in the whole of my current lifetime. So to see that gone in voting is really sad to see.

There is an argument to be made for users that are unaware of the issue and vote "wrongly", I understand. But to imply every normal user does this is a gruesome falsehood, stereotype and logically inept, further exacerbated by further implications that staff will always vote correctly. But to attempt to nullify such a falsehood with a blanket statement that inhibits other users that may legitimately have some good insight to a vote is reprehensible. It helps to make me go completely against such a change becuase of such a terrible and biased foundation. The reasoning behind that crud it is strong and reasonable. The strawmaning is one step for making the whole change completely fall apart.

I don't feel mad or particularly sad. Just a whole lotta disappointment. Still being able to suggest votes is kinda cool. However,  having the issue that "what's best for the wikia" be subjective at it's core and completely makes any vote up to the mercy of a person either likeminded to look over potentail flaws or closeminded to not see the benefit is a large concern for me from here on out. Seriously, Brain smashed that arguement like a Pumpkin.

So overall, this sounds very unappealing. A lot of large generalizations and hinderance to users who don't deserve it, even for a "greater good" that could also end up passing bad changes. If these bad changes are more or less frequent from teh current system depends on how much "critical thinking" you can smuther onto the issue in the future I guess. Hope it works out for better.