SmashWiki talk:What SmashWiki is not: Difference between revisions

Line 139: Line 139:
:We can setup additional guidelines on how to argue against tiers. Regarding arguing matchups and tier list positions, it's already an enforced unwritten rule not to try arguing them here, so we should of course make it written. <span style="font-family:Edwardian Script ITC; font-size:12pt">[[User:Omega Tyrant|<span style="color:forestgreen">Omega</span>]] [[User talk:Omega Tyrant|<span style="color:forestgreen">Tyrant</span>]]</span> [[Image: TyranitarMS.png ]] 01:42, 1 July 2013 (EDT)
:We can setup additional guidelines on how to argue against tiers. Regarding arguing matchups and tier list positions, it's already an enforced unwritten rule not to try arguing them here, so we should of course make it written. <span style="font-family:Edwardian Script ITC; font-size:12pt">[[User:Omega Tyrant|<span style="color:forestgreen">Omega</span>]] [[User talk:Omega Tyrant|<span style="color:forestgreen">Tyrant</span>]]</span> [[Image: TyranitarMS.png ]] 01:42, 1 July 2013 (EDT)
::While arguably necessary, this is significantly "meaner" than the rest of the wiki's culture, and if implemented would require an extra layer of obvious warnings to guarantee that anyone who skips them deserves what they get. I'll look into the possibility of having something like the mobile browser longpage warning for specific pages. [[User:Toomai|Toomai]] [[User talk:Toomai|Glittershine]] [[Image:Toomai.png|20px|link=User:Toomai/Bin|???]] The Inconceivable 11:14, 1 July 2013 (EDT)
::While arguably necessary, this is significantly "meaner" than the rest of the wiki's culture, and if implemented would require an extra layer of obvious warnings to guarantee that anyone who skips them deserves what they get. I'll look into the possibility of having something like the mobile browser longpage warning for specific pages. [[User:Toomai|Toomai]] [[User talk:Toomai|Glittershine]] [[Image:Toomai.png|20px|link=User:Toomai/Bin|???]] The Inconceivable 11:14, 1 July 2013 (EDT)
:Toomai has something of a point here.  If you go through the treatise's talk page, and the forums on tiers, and the tier list talk page, the users on this wiki have generally shown a fair bit of hostility to people who disagree with the existence of tiers.
:That said, I think we should continue to support debate.  We are a separate entity from smashboards, and I don't think we should outsource debate to smashboards, given that it is even more hostile than we are. All points should be open for debate, even if anti-tierists are demonstrably and incredibly wrong.
:Because of this, I don't really think we ought to institutionalize a "no debate" policy, since many of the points hosted on this wiki are somewhat debatable. I think instead we should take this in entirely the opposite direction of being very open to debate, but incredibly hostile to ignorance.  That is, if anybody posts "tiers r 4 queers" they can an instaban because they are trolls, and it's fairly obvious to spot this sort of baiting.
:The issue that I haven't really brought up is that most people who disagree with tiers are trolls and can't sustain argument.  This is, to me, somewhat of an ancillary point.  Just because they can't argue doesn't mean we have to tell everybody who might have honest misconceptions about tiers no chance to interact with us to see that they're wrong.  So, while I get the frustration and the motivation with this proposal, and agree with it to some extent, I must politely '''not support'''. [[User:Semicolon|Semicolon]] ([[User talk:Semicolon|talk]]) 15:08, 1 July 2013 (EDT)
62

edits