Thread:TheSMASHFan/@comment-12408658-20140104005524/@comment-16072884-20140109022436

The site wasn't letting me reply to you for some reason (maybe because Message Walls don't count as talk pages?), so I'll respond now.

I reverted his edits because I thought you made a dumb decision to allow the change to be made before the discussion was fully resolved.

"Fully resolved" means that the discussion has ended, and arguments have ended as well. However, the discussion was not fully resolved in this case. Not waiting until it's fully resolved prevents people from presenting their opinions and arguing against what others have said. I was still replying to what JAlbor said, and now I can't respond to what he said because you've blocked me and went ahead and made a decision. By going and declaring it done, you're not allowing us to say what we have to say. I said a bunch of times that in general, we should be supporting the side that can make stronger arguments, and that's why we need to wait until the discussion is fully resolved. If JAlbor had clearly won the argument and I had nothing left to say, the discussion would have been fully resolved and you could have added it in and that would be done. However, that is not the case in this situation. I'll also add that just because I'm unable to respond to what he said doesn't mean the discussion is fully resolved. We wait until the discussion is fully resolved, and then add the changes; that's how it's always been when handling these kinds of things, and that's how it should always be. We don't add the changes and then discuss whether to keep them. We discuss the changes, and then, once the discussion is fully resolved, we add the changes in.

Your decision ignored the fact that it wasn't fully resolved yet and disregarded the fact that we were arguing. I reverted the decision you made to add it in not because I'm mad that you changed it, but because I think it was a dumb mistake you made. It was not a good idea to go and add it in when the discussion wasn't fully resolved, and that's why I reverted it. I think that users should be able to revert mistakes made by admins if they can explain why it was a bad decision and provide an alternative (which I did). Administrators can make mistakes just like everyone else, and if they make a mistake, there should be a way for other users to reverse that mistake.

I'm not doing any of this because I'm mad that the decision wasn't in my favor. If I had nothing left to say and had clearly lost, I would be totally okay with you guys adding it in. My reason for removing it had nothing to do with my opinion on the subject. If you had gone and changed it after the discussion was fully resolved, I would not have removed the changes. But that wasn't the case here. You made the decision before we were finished arguing, and that isn't how it should work. I reverted the edit because I thought it was a dumb decision you made, not because I'm not willing to accept change. We wait until the discussion is fully resolved, and then add the changes.

To prevent stuff like this from happening again, I'll make a list of steps to follow during these change disputes (this is only a rough outline and we can add stuff to it later):


 * The discussion begins when one user makes a suggestion for changes they'd like to include.
 * Users should state whether they support or oppose the changes.
 * Users can (and should) provide reasons for why they support or oppose. Providing reasons will strengthen their viewpoint and may help convince other users.
 * It is okay if disputes occur between users on opposing sides.
 * After the discussion is fully resolved and enough time has passed for as many users as possible to state whether they support or oppose, a decision will be made to either make changes or keep the page as-is.
 * Decisions should not be based just on votes; the decision should favor the side that can support their viewpoints better with stronger arguments.
 * Users and administrators making decisions should not factor in just their own opinion, and instead listen to the opinions of the entire community, as well as their own.