Board Thread:The Last Sovereign Discussion/@comment-31763506-20190504042018/@comment-1219085-20190514230313

I have been reading the comments section of pages and the tradition has always been that someone makes an edit or adds a new page, and then if a reader dislikes the change, then they bring up a discussion about it before undoing it. When the discussion meets its conclusion, the group decides that the change was an improvement, needs to be undone, or there is a middle ground to compromise on. I believe this system works pretty well, because it isn't as time consuming, more uniformly enforced, and lets the reader see the change instead of trying to conceptualize it.

A system where brings up a change they dislike instead of everyone asking for permission to make a single edit (especially minor ones such as adding links) is immensely time consuming. Most contributions get a universally positive or neutral response, so no discussion isn't remotely necessary. However, there is only two ways to know if the edit will be universally accepted. A) Before making any change, it can go to committee to discuss every change that could possibly be made. B) We can wait for someone to bring up if they dislike the change after the fact. It is obvious which way is more efficient.

This unwritten rule that one must ask permission to make any contributions doesn't seem to uniformly applied to everyone the same way. I been told that I have to ask permission to make small edits like adding new links or removing duplicate links. That hasn't been asked of anyone else before on this wiki. I created a category for members of the races and was told that I should have asked permission before doing it even though no one has problem with those categories. No other category created required discussion except for the ones I made. I didn't use to have a bias against me that required me to ask permission for everything. I use to make a contribution, and then wait for someone to discuss if it has merit (Duplicates). Now the new normal is for someone to press the "undo" button on my work without any discussion on the actual content that I created, and then tell me that I should have asked permission because they perceive some defect in my character. I find this pretty unfair.

The final point is that how can someone dislike something they haven't seen before? If we have to discuss every change before making it, then it would require all parties to conceptualize the change without actually seeing it. This might cause members of the party to dislike an idea, because they may conceptualize it as something different than the result. If the content is created, then everyone can see the same thing. This makes the reader's objection more reasonable, because they discussion is of same content instead of different imagined ideas.

If we are going to move towards the system of having discussions before making any edits, pages, or categories, then the expectation is for everyone to start actually doing it instead of just applying this rule exclusively to me. That means we discuss every new game mechanic page, every new subsection for characters, every new guide, every new stat, etc. It doesn't matter if the discussion might seen unnecessary or time consuming. This is apparently the rule that everyone on this wiki must follow.