Board Thread:General Wiki Discussion/@comment-4833240-20140301051701/@comment-4832646-20140303020736

Dubiousdugong wrote: Princess Callie wrote: Well, if they have that mindset of "ZOMG, SOMEBUDY CRITICIZED MAI PASTA AND TOLD MEH WUT WUZ WRONG WIF IT! I'M SO BUTTHURT NOW." that's their issue. Don't ask those who actually do make it a point to criticize when asked, or even when not, to hold hands with those people. They don't want to put effort into their work if they have that mindset. Why put effort into making it look like we don't care about the fact that they don't want to, when we care about the Quality and effort of the site?

Swearing is swearing. Again, they're just words. Words that add emphasis and don't actually offend any race, religion, orientation, etc.

And you basically just gave the definition of criticism; telling them what they did wrong and how to fix it. Just because it's harsh doesn't make it destructive. Harsh criticism is destructive to a degree; it's a detriment to will and passion. You can point out their errors without telling them that their contribution is "silly," "funny," "sh***y," or otherwise.

Also, I'm not concerned about swearing because of its moral or personal repercussions. I don't like it because it lacks the level of professionalism this Wiki should have. I'd argue its banishment in chat, but that's another argument altogether. That's already been stated. It shows that they have the will to be a writer, not that they thought it was something that required minimal effort.