Board Thread:Wiki Discussion/@comment-1073312-20140816013529/@comment-3332586-20140816030639

Technobliterator, I can fully understand why you think this, and your reasoning is entirely sound. The issue is not so much of representation as it is of the perception of representation. You may think I don't know what I'm talking about, but I can assure you I do. MassiveCraft has the exact same issue Sporewiki is having, and the number 1 way they solve the perceived bias against members issue is by including those members into the management chain. The tutor people who apply for staff so that those people can and do help out with all the duties of being a staff member, and anyone can apply if they meet the few restrictions (namely, 16 years or older, active, and willing to put real effort into running the server). I believe that if the wiki did the same thing several changes would occur: 1) people would drop the bias complaints against staff members. 2) the community would strengthen because the "older v/s newer" conflict would no longer be as powerful, and 3) the wiki would grow and expand faster because there would be more staff to maintain it and work with the players. You could also have 4, less arguments and conflicts because staff would be able to intervene (like you did on the IRC between Hachi & me) to prevent and settle them.

Take this last bit as you will, but I do not think there are enough staff to handle all the aspects of the wiki. Plenty for maintenance, but not enough community-based staff to handle issues like the ones brought up in the original post by Wormy.

Disclaimer: This is in no way an attack on current staff or their actions. This is merely my experience in other communities and other sites. This is also merely a suggestion, and can of course be denied.