Board Thread:General Wiki Discussion/@comment-5590118-20150104162634/@comment-25393922-20150109212224

LOLSKELETONS wrote:

Reviewing and editing diligently is the responsibility of every member on this site... Um lol no it isn't. Nobody here has any sort of "responsibility" to do anything except for people with user rights.

...Particularly, when it comes down to it, admins and VCROC. Right, people with user rights have responsibilities. Responsibilities that would be better off divided between different user groups...right? I mean, that just seems like good teamwork to me.

It's almost as though you're saying "VCROC should be kept because they have responsibilities!" That is actually exactly what he's saying.

So does everyone else in a community at large, and as admins we shouldn't be trying to excuse ourselves from everything but deleting a couple of pages and doing a few Deletion Appeals by shoving a majority of the site clean-up onto four or so people. No. It's simply distributing the workload. Right now admins have a ton of shit they have to deal with, what's wrong with having some people help them out? Isn't teamwork a good thing?

We should not assign responsibility to a single user group, because as it goes higher, the more it seems like a vacation. Just because admins aren't handling every single aspect of site maintenance doesn't mean they're slacking off. I'm willing to bet that if responsibilities were more evenly distributed, productivity would actually go up.

Everyone needs to work as a single team - a community - with a coordinated effort behind it. We need to plan out our movements, not try to decide who is more of a grunt. By "Everyone", do you mean the admins?

Also, lol at the idea that people lower down in the rank are "grunts". This is a wiki, we all have to do dirty work on here. That's just how wikis work. If giving different user groups different types of dirty work is what works best for the wiki, I don't see a problem with it.

And can you please explain to me how giving all the responsibility to the admin team is a more efficient method of teamwork than assigning different groups of users different duties? Because I'm honestly not seeing it.

I would go on, but I stopped reading there. I'm assuming the rest is more of the same. 1. Really? Why did we shut down chat, then? A big opinion was that the chat users were just dead-weight who did nothing for the site. Here's the thing: If you are a member of a community, you have a responsibility to that community - Things run more efficiently that way.

2. Did I say teamwork was a bad thing? As far as having a shitload of work to deal with, it's our job. The moment we applied we should have been prepared for bigger workloads - people help out when the admins help out, because we set an example of how to act and look. We are the leaders of the community. Teamwork is an excellent thing, but it doesn't work by distributing everything to site staff. We must ask the community as a whole to help us - they are using the site, and if they care for it as much as we do, they will help us the best ways they can.

3. I did not say that either. But from what it sounds like, it's almost as though we want the VCROC to handle the larger majority of site clean-up - I won't disagree that it was their general purpose, but admins have that same responsibility. Productivity will go up as we work harder towards a general purpose.

4. I mean, everyone. If they want to help, then we should put them into our plans to help take care of the site.

As far as distributing the workload, it would work better with smaller groups of people, not just user right groups as a whole. More people could tackle each task individually. Things can't be rushed - they take time. I've learned this.