Board Thread:General/@comment-31952814-20160127142629/@comment-28393620-20160128090718

Neutral

In all likelyhood, my reasoning will parallel others who also chose to remain neutral. So instead, I'm going to provide points that contradict/agree with a key idea from people who support or reject this notion in no particular order.

"He's biased. People he knows better are likely to be treated better than new users." I can somewhat understand the reason he acts this way. Given that certain newcomers of the chat were... less than sanvoury, his actions were explainable. However, it still dissapoints me that he subconciously condemns every new user he meets based on the actions of a few.

"His edit count shows his dedication to this wiki." Yes, there is no denying that he has a massive edit count. Not to mention, there's plenty of evidence showing Yap improving the wiki immensely, and not simply scattering fluff around. However, good utilisation of resources does not guarantee a proper management. Without pointing fingers, I've seen time and time again, disgruntled users complain of the somewhat harsh rules and regulation. Don't get me wrong, it could be much, much worse. Yet, by keeping a more open mind, Yap's judgement can seem much fairer and benefit all.

That's about all I have to say. Looking at both sides of this coin, I see why people would support, and why people who oppose. But that's just it, all I see are two sides of a coin, a 50-50.