User blog comment:Obi the LEGO Fan/Regulating "Admin Talk"/@comment-4091019-20150307003642/@comment-4845243-20150307050501

(Responding to BCG's original post, not taking into account the back-and-forth between him and Bourg)

Transparency - If you think transparency is an issue, that is highly problematic. If you are afraid that your opinions might offend people, that is also problematic. In order for a quasi-democratic system like ours to operate correctly we need open communication between admins and the rest of the community. Transparency is only a problem if you have something to hide. Moreover, we really have no right to be making decisions in the dark anyways. Since our opinions are no more valid than those of the rest of the community, it is nonsensical to elevate ourselves to a place where we are not only making decisions, but hiding our opinions.

Also, you didn't respond to my three reasons why transparency is good: it "bolsters trust, destroys barriers, and allows for accountability." How are these not benefits? And how are these counteracted by your fear of being offensive? For an argument to be good, it has to weigh the positive and negative impacts. Even assuming the chance of offending someone is a negative impact, it is clearly outweighed by the benefits.

Efficiency - Actually, I can. Currently, policy decisions and the like already are made by the community. However, we often discuss them on admin talk first and then pass them by the community in a vote. By cutting out the preliminary discussion with admins and going straight to the community, we cut out an unnecessary step. This step is also inefficient because of how inactive some of the admins are. Whereas, in a community vote, activity determines how much say you get. If you aren't active, you just don't get a say, increasing efficiency.

Also, consider this. The reason the LMBW is so poor about making decisions is probably because some of the most knowledgeable and skilled users have gone off by themselves and made decisions without community input (although thankfully my pushes to get the community more involved have been successful). Because of all the destroyed education and because of the "us versus them" mentality created by admin talk, the community is not nearly as equipped. How are new users supposed to learn to make good decisions if there is no precedent to look at?

Education - Wow. I don't really know what to say. How does your personal preference outweigh huge benefits to the community? Because you don't want to deal with the community you would rather destroy a chance for them to have good education??

So, here's what I'm getting from the argument. Your personal preference, what you're most comfortable, is to have a separate admin talk. If that's not the way it's going to be, then you won't participate. Basically, your preference outweighs all the advantages the community would get from implementing Riolu's plan. Is that what you're saying? I apologize if I am misconstruing your argument, but that's what it seems like. You have presented no actual disadvantages to the community.