FANDOM


Yo what it is b*tches, I just got back from vacation in crappy Las Angeles (Seriously, the city is a smoggy wasteland full of punks who want nothing more than to steal your car, apologies to anyone currently living there right now), and I am ready to critique some blogs. Taking a break from the Fishy Opera, I came back to notice that our dear Madman97 has been at it again, making controversial blogs again, with this one that really borders on just plain weird. It garnered many responses from people who Madman was having a conversation with about the system ran by the Admins and most of them, while a little negative, was also a testement to some of the unstable feelings about leadership on this wikia. While I read in the comments that Madman97 wrote the blog simply because it's what he likes to do and he never actually meant to incite a revolution (He was mostly joking about that), there is an air of seriousness toned in with it. Some people really do have a problem with the leadership on this website and while I agree with people in the comments that writing a consensus was a much smarter way to get the Admins attention, this, I theorize, was not specifically for the Admins awareness, but the common peoples. But more on that later. Let's get right into the bulk of this blog. Remember, Bold text is Madman97's blog, normal text is my comments. Remember that any and all opinions expressed here are the sole opinion of myself and me alone and does not represent the overall quality of the work I am critiquing. Only the facts do that. Let's jump in. (Also, i'm gonna get this out of the way. I do not agree with anything Madman97 has put here. I think the Admins have done a fine job so far and just because a few people had problems with it doesn't make the Admins evil. However, like I said before, I will defend my friend because the purpose of the blog was not to actually do anything but just cause a bit of trouble because my friend is a sociopath. Alright, continue). 

If there is one thing I am not really known for, it is public speaking. Most of you know me as a comedian and part time contraversal (Heh, Pickleseller), Loremaster and Theorist. I never really get involved in serious stuff. I'm just here to provide the laughs. But a while ago when I entered chat to promote the newly released Wabbajack Grinding Season 4 Episode 1 blog (Be sure to check it out), I engaged in a discussion that led me to reeavaluate the status of this wikia. Most of you may think there is nothing wrong with it but as I go along, you may feel that a change is necessary as well. Keep in mind that this isn't just one person complaining. A large majoirtity of a near 20-person chat today had their voices heard and told me the situation. Brace yourseles wikians, for this is a very long blog, going from a simple change to a complete upheavel.

Ok, so we start off with Madman97 addressing the crowd, claiming he is not a public speaker and spells the word "Controversial" wrong. I can't fault him for this however, because he did so on purpose to annoy Pickleseller. If there is one thing you can always count on in a Madman97 blog, it's good grammar. Seriously, hardly ever a typo and the presentation is very precise. Nicely done. He goes on, advertising his other blogs, as expected (The ones where he starts screaming when his other stuff stops being funny), and then explains what the point of the blog he is writing is. Alright, I have to say this as well. He knows how to handle introductions. Usually when I am reviewing someone it usually takes them at least an entire paragraph to get to the goddamn point, but here he does it in a few sentences. It keeps the blog moving forward at a steady but deliberate pace. He did spell reevaluate wrong though. Tsk tsk. Sloppy Madman, sloppy. 

He goes onto make the claim that near twenty people told him that the Admins are generally bad people and need to go, which I hear is not true. I was talking to another user who was in the chat and he told me that the discussion only included a couple people, with mostly EmperorJohnson or Zippertrain85 driving the conversation forward, but I am wondering whether or not that harms the quality of the blog. I suppose falsities are something to dock down points for so I guess even Madman won't get away with that. At least he warns us that this will be a long blog, which it really is, it has a table of contents and everything, it's probably the longest blog he's ever written, but let's move on. 


''How Chat Corruption Sparked A Revolution Before I had entered the chat, I had noticed a blog by ShawnHowellsCP stating that some members of the wikia, including a EmperorJohnson and Stendarr (Whenever you go on chat, they're usually there), were to be put on probation. That didn't seem like a big deal to me, but I noticed EmperorJohsnon was personally in chat at the moment. My curiosity peaked and I went in and walked headlong into an argument between a User, Zippertrain85, and EmperorJohnson himself. It was mostly EJ spouting his "Corrupt" Chat stuff again and Zipper arguing with the user about spamming. I never really paid attention to EJ at first howeevr. Still, I asked what the commotion was about and Pelinal Whitestrike, who was also present, told me that tere was a fued between EJ and Stendarr, who were both recently nominated for the position of chat moderator.'''''''''''Ej went on to say that chat was "Corrupt" in the way it worked. I was confused. I never had a problem with it. But EJ decided to go a little more in-depth with his point, thus drawing me into the argument. It wasn't so much an argument as us standing around and listening to EJ bash chat and that it needed reeavluation. I suggested that since "Corrupt" chat was such a provokable problem that someone should make a thread to debate the topic. Zippertrain85 readily agreed, as did EJ. My initial suggestion however was a bit larger in scope than a simple thread, my suggestion being an entire forum set up solely for debate of important topics that decide the policy of the website. It was said that an administrator was the only one who can set them up, and this is where the chat took a turn from  mere suggestion to radical. But first, this new system I have come up with in regards to voting demands at least some feedback and is actually quite a compicated system.   

I'll give Madman this, at least his titles are enough to spark interest. With words like Revolution being thrown around, it's kind of hard not to be curious to look into it. Alright, so this part of the blog is the backstory of how Madman got the idea to write this blog. It first starts when Maddy notices that some members we know and talk to chat are set to be suspended from their accounts and Maddy sees that one of them was in chat right then and is curious as to why. So he goes in and walks headlong into an argument between a user, it was Indylord, Zippertrain85, and EmperorJohnson. Really, there is nothing wrong with this paragraph here. It's solid exposition, and besides that one damning misspelled word, two actually, it's fine. The next paragraph is essentially the same. Exposition which I don't feel like completely going over (You can read), a few misspelled words which further damage his final score (Seriously Maddy, SLOPPY!), and Madman97 introduces us to his new system which, holy f*cking sh*t, is the most complicated system of debate I have ever seen.

The System

So my idea for a Debate Forum wasn't discussed that much, but as I got the idea to write this blog, it all started to come to me. It will require much collaboration and effort, but it could ultimately be a renaissance for the average wikia user.

1) Debate Setup- This part will often require the most help to create. While an entire new forum requires an admin's consent, which is unlikely for various reasons, any thread on a chosen forum will do. The debate on the subject at hand is actually a times session of 24 hours. I know that sounds crazy, but hear me out. The debate thread is not just one, but three full times threads, spread out over the course of a week and a alf. For example, the first round of the debate begins on Monday at 5:00 PM and ends the next day the same time. Fast forward to next week and the second round will begin Monday 5:00 PM, ending the next day, 5:00 PM. The third and final round will begin two days after, on Tursday 5:00 PM, ending Friday at 5:00 PM. The three threads and week long span is to give people time to prepare arguments and let the voting audience think about their decisions. If these debates shall decide the policy of the website, a well thought out and careful argument should be in place. Each debate has three sections within the time limit of 24 hours. The first section lasts for thirty minutes after the thread has been created to let people come in and for the Overseer (more on that in a second), to write the sypnosis of the subject people will be debating. The second session begins with the Overseer's say-so and this will last up until two hours before the designated time limit is up and the Overseer will stop the debate and call for a vote. The vote is not for the side you want to win for the first two rounds however. No, at the end of round one, ten nominee's will be voted for each side to debate on each side's behalf, ten representatives on the PRO side, ten representatives on the CON side. The second round vote will have the audience vote for one representative for each side, who will be the only two people debating within the final round. Only at the end of the third round will the audience vote for a decision to be made. In the event of a forfeit, the Overseer will present the audience with a vote to let the other team win or reschedule another debate for a later date. The winning decision will be put into effect.

2) Participants- Now that we have covered the basic scheme, it will only come to frutition of all parties involved cooperate, building team effort and sportsmenship within the site. Everyone involved has a specific purpose that is vital to the debate. Let's start with the most important position: The Overseer. The Overseer is the one that creates the debate thread, writes the sypnosis of the subject matter in the first comment of the thread (He/she does this all three rounds), and makes sure everything goes smoothly. The Overseer can be selected from Forum or Chat Moderators by popular vote or poll. The Overseer is completely nuetral, only writing a total of three comments in the enetire debate round. He/she must only speak up when someone is getting out of hand and enforce the rules of the debate, which will be looked over soon. One of the Overseer's jobs is informing people that there will be a debate soon via chat, blog, or forum, and set up a time frame for when it will take place. The Overseer must ask around and gather the best times that work for the majority. If the Overseer fails in his/her duty te runner up will take is/her place. He/she must keep a close track of time, ending the debate when it needs to end, and call for a vote from the audience when time runs out. At the end, the Overseer will tally the results, reveal the winning votes, then end the debate.  Every sentence given from the Overseer must be clear and precise.

Let's move onto the bulk of the debate, Users. For the first round, anyone is welcome to voice their opinions and coordinate arguments for as long as the first round is running. Each debate should have two very distinct sides that you can easily tell apart seperated into the categories of PRO and CON, and every debater is required to put PRO or CON before whatever they are are going to say. This will eliminate confusion for which side the debaters are on. Every person involved must follow a set of rules that, again, will be discussed soon. At the end of the first round, ten representatives will be elected by the supporters of PRO's and CON's to debate round two on their behalf. This is to increase incentive to formulate good arguments so they will be nominated by their peers. This is also to make it easier to organize the arguments. In the end of the second round, the audience will vote for two representatives, one for PRO, one for CON. People who are not nominated representatives are not allowed to comment within the thread until voting commences. It is ultimately the vote of the normal users that will determine the outcome of the debate. At the end of round one, twenty representatives in total should be nominated, ten for PRO, ten for CON. If a representative is unable to make it to another round, they can pass on the responsibility to someone else through talk page so it can be verified. This is to prevent random people walking in. However, once the responsibility is passed, the original representative cannot show up. At the end of round two, two representatives will be chosen from among the twentty to debate the final round. The representatives are not allowed to vote. Forfeiting the second round will require a majority of the representatives consent, and the Overseer will offer the choice of the other side winning or a reschedule. The average User can vote on all of this. 

3) Rules-The rules here are pretty much the same as every forum. There is a five strike rule. If one violates the rule five times, they will ave their comments removed and asked to leave the debate. 

A. Everyone must maintain proper language, grammar (small mistakes are fine), and behavior. No cursing allowed. Anyone who doesn't abide by these rules will have the comment deleted.

B. The Overseer must not talk unless stepping to calm a rising problem. If the Overseer does not do his/her job, they will be removed.

C. Representatives breaking the rules will be disqualified.

D. All minor debates are to be settled elsewhere.

....Feel free to read that entire thing, I'm sure as hell not writing it all down in a summary for you. He spelled renaissance right, so I would just take his word that this was done well. Seriously, this was done pretty damn well. Even if the idea he presenting is convulted and, while good on paper, as one commenter puts it, in practicality, would probably not work, because (This is just my opinion), we are simply not organized enough for that sort of plan. Like Madman97 says, much collaboration is needed and we are just not that systematic. In all honesty, I want to see this happen just to see if it would work, and it is an interesting idea, but we are limited by the sheer rabbleness of our behavior. After reading all this, I can safely conclude that while Madman97 may not really care about the status of the wikia, the fact that he took the time to write all this stuff down probably means that he did want this idea to come to light and he did want to see it happen, so while it is an overall satrical blog, there is indeed a hidden message. I applaude the bold move. There's rules and sh*t. It has to be good.

The Revolution

Ok, all that wasn't even close to what the radicalness of what we in chat were talking about. In fact, the discussion to open a new way of debate lasted only two minutes. No, our discussion took a turning poinjt when we started talking about Admins. One might look at my idea and think this is WAY overblown for just a way of debating when we could just put up a damn poll, but that's the point. It's to get their attention. The Admins. The Chat Corruption problem pales in comparison to the one we face now. Let me explain. As I requested EJ to ask an admin about making a new forum devoted to debating, a surprising number of people stated their resentment of the way things were run by the Admins. At first, I was skeptical, but then I started to hear the stories people were telling me, starting with this one.

The Admins Just Don't Care

This seems like a trivial problem, but it's true. When's the last time an Admin personally helped you with your problem. I remember a certain Admin, *Cough*Jimeee*Cough*, completely ignored my complaint about a bullying wikian. I understand Admins have jobs to do, but part of their job is to help with any trouble their users have, and not helping them is unacceptable. Not all Admins are bad, of course not, but a lot of them can be snooty. Have the reason we were discussing Admins in the first place is when someone told me the admins woun't go for something that seems difficult, like my forum idea. A great idea blown because someone was too lazy. Here's another story.

The Zipper Schism

Many of you might have heard of the Zipper Schism, you knowm when Zipper was de-modded for insulting Jimeee? It wasn't just a quick thing, no, it was practically an event that nearly threw everyones good vibes out of whack. Because of disagreements with the leadership, Zip was banned from the wikia, or at least suspended, by Jimeee simply because the Admin couldn't take a little backtalk, because the internet is not supposed to be comprised of any of that apparently. Banning someone simply because they got a little cross with you is an abuse of power.

The Jimeee Thread

Forum and Chat Moderators alike detest this particular piece of garbage. This isn't just a random account of some randon user complaing that the leadership here is corrupt, no, this is a real thing you can look up and see Admin AutoBlood insult every Chat and Forum person there ever was by stating te opinions of Main Editors and Admins are worth more than theirs, something I seriously detest. For those of you who don't know, Administrator is just a job, much like the Overseer in my idea, that serves as the mediator and makes sure things run smoothly. However, unlike the Overseer, these Admins straight up insult other people who cannot do anything back or risk suspension form their account. If there is anything I have taught you people, it's that everyone has the right to b*tch and moan and not get punished for it. 

The EmperorJohnson and Stendarr Fued

This one wasn't particularly interesting at first until I heard the ending, which is infuriating when you want to fight for equality between everyone here while the Admins treat things like a feudal dictatorship. It was standard stuff, EJ got nominated for Chat mod, Sten got jealous or mad or something, and requested that he be a mod too. Request. It's a rule, I remember, that in order to become a mod, you have to be nominated by a higher up because of work force and skill, but Stendarr gets a free pass I guess. 

While most of these seem small, these small events build up and up into a great big pile of what the f*ck. And I am not the only one who feels this way. This is injustice to the highest degree, at least on internet, to just strut your stuff like a peacock and flaunt your little admin badges into the faces of everyday wikians. To make our internet hub (Not PornHub), into a dictatorship. Well, I SAY NAY! As do others. The answer is with us people, it's time to make the admins change. If you support my ideas, please let me know below. If you've noticed a flaw in my idea or just disagree, comment anyway! Let me know! And VIVA LA REVOLUTION. Also Stay Ranty.    

Ok, I really just wanted to wrap this up, and while I am not going to summarize all this for you, you can see this is where things stop getting serious and start getting comical again, even if one doesn't really notice. When I first read this blog without Madman telling me he wasn't actually trying to cause revolution, I knew right away this was not supposed to be serious, but I can't blame others for thinking so. I actually know the guy and thus know a little better whether or not he is really joking. So this is where he gives evidence, if you could call it that, that the Admins are kind of jerks to normal users. These claims are all very true, but exaggerated to an extent, to a point where they are not true. I remember the Jimeee thread and the whole thing with Zipper and I agree with madman that the Admins did not really handle those well, but neither did Zipper. However, not everyone knows about it and if you are trying to give an expository blog, evidence is needed, no matter what. Madman himself aknowledges it when he is mentioning the Jimeee thread, that it was something you could actually see for yourself instead of just taking his word for it. That, unfortunately, docks him down a few points, but as before, the paragraphs are well written, well drawn out, and feel informational, even if its false. The ending paragraph beautifully puts the situation as "A big pile of what the f*ck" and Madman gives his exiting speech. Heh, Pornhub. He gives the little patriotic revolution Marxist speech and invites you to comment on whether or not his idea was completely stupid or not. Most opted for stupid. Which it kind of is, but that doesn't matter. This blog is actually kind of awesome.

And the verdict is (Drum roll please)

....

VERY GOOD (Or whatever ranks second highest on the list because I kind of forgot my own scale)

Final word: Look this blog would have gotten perfect if not for the grammatical errors almost every paragraph. It's not that I agree with the ideas or really care what the idea is when it comes to judging the quality of the blog, it's just expertly written. Besides the grammar hiccup here and there, every sentence has a purpose, even the lamebrained joke designed to relieve you from the overall seriousness the blog presents with the concept of a dictatorship ruled by Admins. It is actually an interesting subject and should be discussed a little more. I think the blog does its job perfectly because the blog brings the idea to the people who really matter. Not the Admins, but everyday normal users who make up the Wikia. It would be inspirational if not for the complicated debate idea and the whole viva la revolution thing, but...actually, it is sort of inspirational too. It says "Hey, share what you think, no matter what everybody else says" and I enjoy that message because it also invites others to do so. You see an opinion blog on here and it's usually just the person stating their opinion and doing whatever they can to make sure people think they're right and are not open to any criticism or different ideas. However, Madman freely invites you to criticize away to your hearts content. I think Madman97 is a much better blogger than people give him credit for, and I would be honored to review another one like these. Some may think I am being a bit biased since I personally know the guy, but I am dead serious, say to my face without humerous intent that this is just another poorly written overly complicated and all around unworthy blog to grace the public. I dare you. Ill be back later for more fishy blogs, but for now, Blog Critic out.