Board Thread:Special Admin Messages/@comment-25793989-20180602214408/@comment-25793989-20180607064656

DekuDesu! wrote: Popstar792 wrote:

WhoWatchesTheToasters wrote: No community is perfect. You propose removing the public enemies, a list of people who have attacked this wiki. I like Hood and Cutter because they are strict people who stand up to others.

You threw 3 months of hard negotiations, which I was involved heavily in, out the window when you unbanned Tangy, Rogue, and Carrot, then told us afterwards.

I do not like your platform. That is my position, your's may be different, and I respect that. But I have mine as well. Well, quite true. I'll stay neutral on this, but I'll only say that since I've been here Ittyy has been suggesting we unban many public enemies. I personally think that Ittyy wants peace, but not all enemies deserve to be unbanned. They sometimes need to learn their lesson. Unbanning them will give them the mindset that they can do things that are against the rules in the future and eventually be unbanned. We need a bureaucrat that keeps a hard stance on the rules no matter what and won't just unban people to create peace. It doesn't always make peace and the way for an enemy to realize their wrong-doings is that they be punished and they eventually will make their own peace. No offense to Ittyyy, but this is what I don’t like about his campaign. I would just like to clarify that I am not just unbanning people to create peace, I just don't want to create more long, tedious, stressful and wiki-dividing processes that come with banning/unbanning people. Another thing I would like to mention is that along with my campaign of peace I am still banning people as much as other bureaucrats would do, however it is just where I wish to direct my bans that will change. For example, I will probably spend more time focusing on flamers and other users who make others feel unhappy/uncomfortable rather than creepypasta believers etc. However, depending on the offense, I do tend to give out second chances to those I believe can do well, for example Chas. (Although I didn't actually give him a second chance) However, people such as Tangy decide to waste their chance, and so they get banned straight away. That's that. I don't want less banning, I just want people to not be a jerk or get lost.

Also, sorry Toasters, I didn't mean to have your negotiating go to waste. I just thought it would be easier to unban them and have that over with. Sorry. :/