Hi folks.
Considering recent events, my eyes have been opened to a lot. The whole time, I thought I knew what I was doing, but in reality I was just making matters worse. So, after a few words with a fellow user, I've come to a conclusion. It doesn't take a bureaucrat to bring the community together, it takes the community to work together towards a better goal. We can't expect one man to hold this Wiki up alone; so as an administrator, I will take it upon myself to help this community get back on track and get everyone involved, not just the prominent editors. Because remember, everyone here (even the anonymous users) deserve their say and should not be chastised for having their say freely.
So, I'm going to give a list of things I feel need to be worked on. And I want the whole community, be it anonymous users, admins, or just anyone who wants to put their say in to work alongside one another and tell us admins as leaders what we can do to make this place accessible for everyone. That means I want users like Emiko and Old World Relics who have told me that they feel left out to really get active and tell us what they want out of this. We need to come together as a community and figure out what needs to be done. 
Issues
Administrator-Only votes
On certain votes, we've had "Administrator-only" voting rules. This is on issues such as Talk Page rules, or other concerns. Now, this is not good, people. Everyone has a say here, not just the people who "matter". Because everyone should matter. If there's an issue, we need all opinions on how to resolve it.
Anons can't vote
This isn't fair. Anons are no different to normal users, other than they don't have an account name or an avatar. Anons were allowed to vote once upon a time. Look at Gothemasticator's bureaucrat request; if Anons were allowed to vote then, they should be allowed to vote now. Just because they don't log in doesn't make their contributions any less valuable!
Forums regarding rules changes
For the most part, these are helpful. But when you drag on for ages about Talk Page archiving, is it really that important? The average user doesn't come here to learn about when they can or can't archive a talk page. We need to listen to the concerns of the common user and work on that, not just what the administrators are interested in.
Popularity votes
No more of these. I know it's something we can't work on, but when you vote for someone you need to vote because you think they're qualified, not because you like them. Please do not vote for someone based on preference! This goes for the other way around too - if you dislike someone, don't vote no because you're trying to upset them.
Bullying of votes
There have been occasions where, not naming names, some users have been bullied due to their vote. It happened on Limmiegirl's admin request and on other applications. Nobody should be made to feel bad or have their opinions ridiculed because they didn't go with everyone else. One user told me that he no longer wants to vote on anything because of his opinions being ill-received in the community.
Sysops/Known user privileges
This one should be obvious. If an admin goes to a blog, and typed "Fallout 3 sucks", then they often get away with it. If an anon goes to a blog and says the same thing, they'll be banned for flamebaiting. Now, come on. We can't be giving certain users more privileges based on their standing in the community. If you break a rule, you get punished regardless of who you are. Same goes for chat offences.
- The Nemesisx: You're fine to argue your point, but don't go putting down the person you're debating with by saying things such as "Your argument is weak, futile, stupid" ect. That's not debating, that's just being a dick.
Public Forum
This is more an idea. What if we had a public forum of some kind where people can go to post their concerns, or things that they want to see changed? Some people are hesitant to tell us their ideas to help this Wiki because they're just a regular user. And some people don's even know where to go with their problems. Often lesser-known users are overlooked when they give an idea, but really, everyone's ideas are eligible regardless of who you are in this community.
Comments
So, basically, those are some things I think can help heal the rift between well-known users and the common user. We need everyone to get involved in the changes happening, not just the admins. I no longer want to see people feel scared to speak up or get ignored because they're not well known. Give me your thoughts on this and PLEASE add some of your own ideas, so that hopefully we can work towards a better Wiki. 02:09, March 17, 2012 (UTC)
Last one first Yessie, we have that, you're posting in it. ;-) Agent c 02:11, March 17, 2012 (UTC)
I would like to point out that your last idea is already being experimented on by me with my ANB. :P 
Skål! 02:13, March 17, 2012 (UTC)
With the Syspos one, i need to throw in some of my two cents there. I belive that if a flame war breaks out and an admin, user or anon is involved in it and becomes getting nasty then they should obviously face the consequences BUT we allready know this. What i want is if an admin debates the issue and gets nasty within the debate then they MUST not be allowed to get away with it, ive noticed some admins (not nameing names) get a bit aggressive in arguments and then turn around and say we don't have to "Sugar coat" everything. Sorry but in the end of the day if your seen as being nasty towards that user then you are in violation of a rule, things like these are NOT tolerated upon any other site, wikia or anywhere else, your fine to argue your point but don't go putting down the person your debating with by saying things such as "Your argument is weak, futile, stupid, ect" thats not debating, thats just being a dick. You respect the other's point and then rebutle, of course now that ive typed this up i can see a huge thread emerging and thus my view becomeing one of a massive debate lol.
TheNemesisx 02:23, March 17, 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, this is a good addition to the rules.
- "We are all free to state our opinions, but only in a respectful manner."
- This is great, I'm adding it above.
02:29, March 17, 2012 (UTC)
Anons not voting. I think this has to stay, to ensure the integrity of the vote. I think you should be required to have an account, and a token edit somewhere on the wiki (dated prior to the vote) to be a valid voter, including user and talk pages. Its not exactly a high hurdle, and it helps ensure a clean vote with as limited ballot stuffing as possible- that should be the only restriction, no admin only votes. Agent c 02:27, March 17, 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, I really don't want to constantly be hopping onto WIMIP checking for proxy IPs... Message 02:30, March 17, 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, I really don't want to constantly be hopping onto WIMIP checking for proxy IPs...
- Put me down for another no anon on votes. They deserve all the other rights, but in order to ensure there's no "ballot stuffing" we've got to have some system of voter registration. Having an account does that. As for special forums for causes and gripes, we've got all the server space we need on these forums right here. I don't think we need a special one. The folks who don't know how to start a forum here won't know where to look for or how to add to one that's already built for them. They will do what they've always done, leave a message with an admin. The admin can always bring the issue to the forums. The Gunny 03:04, March 17, 2012 (UTC)
- Put me down for another no anon on votes. They deserve all the other rights, but in order to ensure there's no "ballot stuffing" we've got to have some system of voter registration. Having an account does that. As for special forums for causes and gripes, we've got all the server space we need on these forums right here. I don't think we need a special one. The folks who don't know how to start a forum here won't know where to look for or how to add to one that's already built for them. They will do what they've always done, leave a message with an admin. The admin can always bring the issue to the forums. The Gunny
I like the thought on the popularity vote. If I ever run for admin,which I doubt, I want people to vote for me because they think I deserve it. I know the only reason I got my Mod spot is because of my halfway decent popularity in the community. Which I was fine with at the time. I don't want to sound hypocritical by saying no more popularity votes because mine was a popularity contest which today I regret applying for because now I feel like I didn't deserve it at the time. Sometimes I still do feel like I don't deserve it but that's not the reason why I'm posting this. Though there will never be a vote that won't have popularity involved it would be nice if popularity wasn't taken into account straight off the bat.
I don't think anons should vote either though they may have in the past, but all anons can't be trusted. There are a few out there who can be trusted, but I think they should at least have an account.
Admins, shouldn't have a free pass either when it comes to insults and such for not agreeing with someone or is a debate and should be handled in a appropriate manner. ToCxHawK 03:01, March 17, 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for reminding me. I've seen users banned because they offered a personal opinion that they thought one game was better than another. The admin gave them 3 more posts to defend their OPINION and when the user didn't they were banned. That kind of abuse has absolutely no place here. The Gunny 03:08, March 17, 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah that has no place here and nobody should get a free pass. Not even the most respected admin/person. ToCxHawK 03:11, March 17, 2012 (UTC)
Point by point address
Administrator-Only votes
That was quickly corrected, and there haven't been a repeat since. So honestly I don't know why dig this up again as an issue.
Anons can't vote
To be blunt, this is absurd. First, the potential for abuse (sockpuppeting for instance) is enormous. Secondly, anons aren't accountable. They have no reputation, specially if they have dynamic IP. So essentially they have nothing to lose, which is also why so much of the time vandalism/spam is done by anons. Lastly, they're not committed. I'm aware of exceptions, but as a rule they're anons because they couldn't even be bothered to register.
In short, treating anons like they're dirty is wrong, but giving them a right to vote is ridiculous. There's a line between being inclusive and being populist, and this crosses that line by miles.
Forums regarding rules changes
I really don't know what is being proposed here. Stopping discussions about rule changes?
Popularity votes
I agree.
Bullying of votes
Nobody was bullied for they votes in my request. Saint Pain was merely asked to elaborate on why he thought there were too many admins, which is perfectly reasonable in a discussion. He only later received flack for trowing insults, unbacked accusations, and being a coward. And I say coward completely unapologeticly here. He was a coward because when asked to provide evidence to back up his insults and accusations, he hid behind his usual vague pseudo-deep ramblings and didn't back up anything he said.
Sysops/Known user privileges
I agree.
Public Forum
We already do have those. If there users who don't know how to use the ones we already have, creating another isn't going to help. If anything, the redundancy is going to make things more complicated, not simple.
Limmiegirl 
Talk! ♪ 04:20, March 17, 2012 (UTC)