Board Thread:Wiki-Related Discussion/@comment-5679696-20160822181638/@comment-1916997-20160823042436

Utter solitude wrote: I can understand that, but it is not the case. Someone who is openly hostile and disrespectful to others, publicly or not, should not be in a position of power. I am not perfect, i make mistakes, but I don't go around calling people liars or claiming someone is manipulating others. This is what he's been doing, and it's why he's blocked. And it wasn't a decision I wanted to make, nor was it one I made alone.

Think of it this way: if you came to me, Choc, and told me a user was saying nasty things to you in a chat pm, they would be blocked. How they present themselves publicly wouldn't even factor into it.

But you have an excellent point about transparency. I'm making the promise now that we will do what we can to be as transparent as possible.

And again, it's not about sharing. As I said earlier, I suggested promoting all three admins. If it was about sharing power, there would have been no reason for Killian to have refused that idea.

I'd still be willing to do so if I hadn't needed to block him. I think the problem is that we already established that you, Applegirl, and Nightlily basicaly agree on everything, meaning you guys would always win majority vote. It's how Lady was demoted and now how Killian was blocked. Even on here, look who is backing you up: Applegirl and Nightlily. Giving all four of you bureaucrat rights defeats the purpose, because then it is you 3 vs Killian, and you will always win.