Poor, Edmund W (Edmund.W.Poor@abc.com) [050715 02:53]:
I'm thinking of deciding this one myself. Dr. William M. Connolley can be trusted not to abuse admin powers, and it's not supposed to be a big deal. He got 70% to 30%, but a lot of the objections were irrelevant in my opinion. I had objected vociferously at first (go ahead, look it up ;-) but Erik (user:Eloquence) convinced me to change my vote to neutral. I have been reading the comment stream, and now I feel I should take matters into my own hands. Any objections?
70-30 is good but not quite there. Almost anyone with a score like that makes it through the next time. I think this is a "when in doubt, do nothing" case.
Someone will renominate him in a month or two and he'll be a shoo-in.
- d.