Book:Admins and Villains

 

My serious take is that the mods do not like me because of how I joined the wiki, various mistakes I made, and my immaturity level, and for some of them they take it too far and think I am a troll/villain. Furthermore they don't like the fact that a channel was made and think this is all a big joke. Therefore I believe some mods have a short fuse where they see the "villain" misusing the channel that shouldn't even exist, and are quick to passive aggressively deride the channel or the person. I think that is justified from their perspective but on the other side it hurts my feelings and is unproductive. The goal of the wiki is to flourish with activity and alternate history; from their perspective they are messing with a troll who harms alternate history, from my perspective they are messing with someone trying to create alternate history. I can understand their perspective. If we assume everyone agrees that growing the wiki is good, the only explanation is that they want to deride me because I am harmful, as they should if I was. So my goal isn't to get revenge on the mods, it's to hopefully use kindness and good faith works to convince them I am not harmful, to convince them that we are brothers and friends in this quest. This quest of making alternate history.

Consider the admins as those we ostensively trust as the most mature, as the most conscious of improving the wiki. Therefore, what I argued partially in my first essay was that because the admins are equipped as such, we need them to accept the efforts of the users, to "be the bigger man". To not impede other people changing, but to welcome it. We need the admins to have the patience and kindness to recognize when someone is trying to change and improve, and to let them.