Thread:CDRW/@comment-25494824-20150317104228/@comment-25490263-20150317115555

Dumbness

If responding point-by-point is dumbness, fine.

We have tried to reason with the editor several times

Yes, we have made many long-winded responses to each other. We being dragonjet, Gensui Hime, SlashZero, & I. Perhaps in early recognition of this issue, no one else said much.

Shooting down everyone's opinions

Responding point-by-point is not shooting down. It was utilized to structure a response. It often ends up being one-on-one debates, yes. We can hard-headed, yes. Do I not give give in easily? Yes. Is it an issue with numerous threads? I don't believe it is, though that evidently isn't agreed upon.

The nasty frontpage revamp discussion was my fault, yes. I would like to state that if my poor wording was pointed out as well, instead of only questioning the opinion provided, I could have realized the actual issue instead of responding to a different one.

The template:shiplist is between two different editor views. Mathiaszealot & Ckwg initially acquiesced for the 26 days until SlashZero protested. Ninthsense provided an opinion later. If additional people do not agree with my views, would it not be useful to at least post the oppose template?

The recent update thread issue was a point-by-point response after the initial vague suggestion was clarified. Was it more disagreeable than the other long responses?

The chat quote that ArcticaFrost & Gensui Hime can provide was in response to the above's initial vague suggestion wording only. Was it inflammatory, yes. No doubt staying away from chat is desired by them & has been followed.

He references our comments word for word and uses it against us as some sort of twisted evidence

Why is referencing bad? Considering responses by me often are long, organization & clarity would be preferable. Twisted evidence? Okay....?

''He doesn't seem to understand the meaning of compromise and getting together with others. Below is a reference:''

In the linked thread, the last few comments had opinions offered with sarcasm & linking to the suggestion locations. The sarcasm was in response to comments about me rather than the issue. Until the last few comments, I only reported & responded to questions regarding what was meant by a request. dragonjet's earlier settling of the issue was not contested & links were provided for proposing changes given Zoidect's protesting.

I would like to state that, to my recollection, not many points of compromise were mentioned during those discussions, or arguments as apparently they were. Many were simply rebuttals to each other's views. Evidently, they do not agree.

So far, me, ArcticaFrost, Dragonjet, and other regulars of the wikia have agreed that this is kind of concerning.

Evidently, they did not want to discuss with me. Very well, I await judgment.

As a first step, I will refrain from most commenting, especially within suggestions & the report thread, as I engender negative feelings.