User blog comment:Emmaelise401/Official Resignation - Corruption Spreads/@comment-3225604-20160106142321

I respect your opinion but I was particularly shocked with some of your false claims.

First, it's not true that nearly none of the admins here are active. At least 8 here I can daringly say are active. Just because they don't make an edit, doesn't mean they are not active, if they have logged into the wiki and see what's going on. Moreover, JoyIF is active again, so I don't know why you say she is inactive. Then, you are saying some admins are not demoted because of their "inactivity". Why did you not oppose the extension of the inactivity rule in the first place? Saying CCSW is dying because some admins are very inactive but are still under the inactivity rule supported by most of the users here is contradictory.

Second, do you have any proof that an admin can't follow their own rules? If you do, you should really bring it out as this can affect their admin status. If they do really "can't follow their own rules", it will be a serious problem. Unless you really have a proof on that, otherwise it is a serious allegation.

Third, I'm not sure why you say our admins are "immature". I think restricting the freedom of speech of others to a large extent is more immature than what you claim. You do really think our wiki "went into a craze" with the letter "W", but what I see is that after it has become a cliche, we have tried our best not to mention it again very often. Moreover, it was just only an "admin" who was trying to overly popularize the letter or overly bring the hype. You can't just blame on that "admin" particularly to the whole admin team because that's unfair. While it has become a cliche, was it really worth banning it? I know you can show your frustration towards the overly hyped word, but you can't completely control what others say. The latter even shows more immaturity than the one who just overly hyped it.

And before you say this wiki is "purely immature", have you also reflected yourself? How do you explain YOUR HYPES? I was disgruntled you just blame immaturity on us without reflecting what you have done.

Fourth, what's so provoking with revealing your true identity? I think before Michael, your true identity "kind of" revealed in the Ice Bucket Challenge, but you have no problem with that. Although it was Michael's fault to completely expose your personal details, as long as your home address, or everything about your daily lives and etc. are not exposed, you don't need to fret about it. I'm not sure for this case, but if our admins turn out we have deleted that information quickly, I don't think we are feeding trolls, and we also do block Michael for 1 week because of his constant actions.

Fifth, did Wiki Mascot contests really turn the wiki into a war? I have more memories for this one. It seems to me the belligerents are just you (maybe one or two more) and most of the users here. Did we argue over like when I was trying to achieve a difficulty to be voted by the public? Apart from that, wiki mascots represent the wiki. If we choose mascots which are not related to Candy Crush Saga, others may think it is strange. Furthermore, the emphasis of this wiki is distorted (focus on the users rather than the wiki content).

Sixth, it was not a problem with you using the "Wii Fit Trainer" as your profile picture, but you try to hype it until we find it annoying. I might as well rant here. Did you know we are very annoyed with you on stressing on your Wii Fit Trainer and stuff? You do constantly repeat the same thing on chat and sometimes in comments. Now, you are blaming on us we are actually trying to stop you without thinking you've been overly using your Wii Fit Trainer. I found it unfair that you blame us for overly using W, but you now blame us for restricting the use of Wii Fit Trainer, Russian and others... Have you stood on our side to know how it feels when Wii Fit Trainer is overly hyped? Before you try to blame us for something, please also consider what you have done.

Seventh, didn't we have some policies to prevent power hunger? The admin nomination process was already an example, even though 3primetime3's revision can also do the same effect. After all, did the users you mentioned as "power hungry" try to seek for rights?

Eighth, we have improved on since we chose what to highlight carefully. There was a time that every game was highlighted but we acknowledged that problem and we improved. Also, what do you mean the admin count is high? If the game sends people to fights, I think it's just only their problem. Does banning games on this wiki will ever work if you honestly want to try to prevent any dramas happening from games? Lastly, how is this related to the wiki "dying"?

Ninth, chat activity is not a sign that the wiki is dying. Remember this is a Wikia, it is created to provide information, not a "social networking website". "Chat" is just an accessory to the wiki. Disabling that or that being idle does not reflect that the wiki is dying. Most of us surf wikis to look for information, rather than interacting with users, right? Besides, communication can still be enhanced through other means like message walls and forums rather chat. Mind you, chat in the Wikia is not the only way to keep our users in touch. How about we communicate through Skype, Facebook, Whatsapp etc.?

Tenth, it doesn't matter whether the founder is completely inactive or over 75% of the contributions are related to wiki activities/games. As long as this wiki is updated and informational, there is no problem with that and it is not a sign that the wiki is "dying". We still manage to have more than 30k readers per day and in fact we are constantly challenging our peak position in WAM score recently. Our wiki is dying? I don't think so and I don't think I'm living in denial.