User blog comment:Alemas2005/What the hell is going on here?/@comment-5369341-20160220012214

"Is the wiki dying...due to us?" Sort of. It's dying due to a superiority complex that's rampant among teens and young adults today, specifically in most of the users here.

This complex has only gotten worse as people have gotten older. The members (and staff) here frequently verbally abuse the members of the LMBs, scorn anyone "less mature" than themselves, and claim the old boards weren't this way. The irony is that they can't seem to distinguish between reality and nostalgia.

In doing this, they've unwittingly set themselves up as utter hypocrites. The members (well, some of them) and staff claim to be welcoming, yet frequently ridicule the only people that would think to join. They claim to be welcoming, yet even the staff rarely greet anyone when they come on chat. (Most of the time they only greet someone who's already a good friend.)  Once again, the irony is that the newer, "less mature" members from the LMBs (that are often included in scorn-fests), are the ones that actually welcome everyone who comes online. This, and other toxic behavior has not only been seen in members, but has even been fueled by CMs and admins.

The staff, particularly the admins, often emphasize that they are not "leaders" here, but only have tools that other people don't have, and that the wiki belongs to the community. In doing so, they have also abandoned the qualities that make leaders effective; qualities that are always good to have. They have no standard of practice, no actual qualifications for staff (other than edits, how articulate you are, and whether or not the community likes you), and there is no aim. Each staff member does their job (if it can be called a job if there's no responsibilities to fulfill) based on their own set of standards and ideals (how often does an admin or CM say "we believe___?"). The staff has no common goal of a "better" wiki. From a management perspective, this would be utter chaos..

There is no unity among the staff. Because of the lack of commons standards and aims, communications are tense and often abrasive, there is no common interest, heck, there's just nothing in common period. The only unifying factor is the star next to their name in chat. Why do we even call them a "team?"

Regardless of their animosity toward the title, the staff has led the community. In shirking qualifications and standards, the community followed suit. When they stopped enforcing rules, the community kept breaking them. (Heh, but are they really breaking rules if they can change them the next day in a vote?) The only rule that everyone recognizes is that unpopular staff get demoted.

The wiki is killing itself. It's choking on its own saliva, and disparages anyone who says something's wrong. If you want change, you start with a mentality shift from the top down.