On 7/14/05, Poor, Edmund W Edmund.W.Poor@abc.com wrote:
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?
Ed Poor Bureaucrat
Yes.
He's currently on revert probation from the Arbitration Committee. If that's "irrelevant" and not a significant objection, I don't think there are any valid significant objections to anything anywhere on Wikipedia.
If the revert probation is unfair or incorrect, he should petition to have that removed first.