Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-27097330-20170101033205/@comment-25597877-20170102003142

Has anyone stopped and considered that the number one problem with this wiki is arguments. How about the fact that admins are supposed to be the ones stopping those arguments. So by what logic makes you people think that having admins of conflicting viewpoints is a remotely good idea?

My picks

Admins:

Indom

Shade

Mods:

Eureka

Prince

There are others who are qualified but these are my picks for the limited space we have. Prince and Eureka are well invested and love the wiki, but ultimately are too opinionated for admin spots. My apologies to both of you, you are both great friends of mine but we can't have admins who take sides. Indom has a superb track record, I can't recall him ever being troublesome, he doesn't tolerate the arguments that plague this wiki, and he remains logical/unbiased. Although it seems a bit selfish and power hungry to say I should keep my position, I truly wish the best for the wiki and believe that I work similarly to Indom and will be able to work effectively alongside him.

Although ultimately this is Auras choice, not even a unanimous popular vote can cement any of this.