Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-189.217.47.59-20161206085118/@comment-189.217.47.59-20161208110407

Nikoli the rebel wrote: 189.217.47.59 wrote: @SomeoneYouUsedToKnow You say most of the complains people point out are either accurate or exaggerated but I've only seen the latter. Everytime I confront the complains and tell people "Give me an example, point me to a single occasion that proves your complains are right". And every single time I do that... They just leave.

Me: "What happened? Can I get the details?" Them: ..............

Me: "Look here, this explains why your edit was deleted". Them: .............

I'm assuming the wiki isn't nearly as bad as people make it out to be because everytime I ask them why they think such, they drop the argument. Honestly, I'm starting to assume they're just trolls at this point. You should have more conversations with these people instead of us. It sounds like you made the thread to confirm your own bias. What did you expect us to say about our own critics? Didn't you read? I told you, I'm trying but I can't get a clear answer from them. This isn't the first time, I've been in at least six different threads and since nobody bothers to explain their issues with the wiki, I thought talking to the wiki itself might shed some light. It's the only option I had at this point and it did pay off. After all, the users aren't claiming innocence. Now I know how the wiki used to be and the details that lead people to dislike it in the past. So what are you on about bias?