on wikipedia the best way to be involved with a discussion like that is to follow all of it all of the time where these 'perennial' discussions never lead to progress is because so many people chip in without knowing what has been previously discussed a typical example is user protonk who leaps in with a tldr speech but does not offer one single solution then complains at me because i have the decency and the civility not to name names and not to take his bait i always have a distrust for admins who can't keep a civil tongue in their heads the real reason and it's been confirmed dozens of times why people won't run for office whatever year they started editing the wikipedia is because they are just not prepared to go through the ordeal that rfa has become period with the exception of two or three who failed on technicalities in all the others that failed shouldn't even have wasted our time with their applications anyway i mean just look through them many people want to be admins for all the wrong reasons some even join wikipedia with the intention of wanting to be an admin as soon as possible take a deep breath look back and try to figure out why for example i have never run for adminship in spite of my maturity retired professor edits since squeaky clean record no warnings blocks or deleted files or pages civility clue and helpfulness wp ear user questions answered balanced involvement in wikpedia policy development npp blp page creations and some ga and micromanaging a major project then you have the answer keep the questions coming