On 9/13/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
Objections which are answered by the nominator but which the objectors can't be found to cross off lead to the nomination failing, for example. Go read WT:FAC, there's an example listed. The nominator in that case was told "gee, go away and try harder."
My objection is to a process which the regulars can straight-facedly say to someone who just got an FA and is objecting to the personalised shittiness of the process, "go away and learn to write properly" and have this tolerated as a response. Does that encourage the content creators to actually bother, or to say "screw you guys, I'm going home"?
I guess I would be hesitant to judge the overall FAC process based on the interaction between Francesco and FAC regulars. Rare are FACs that get so heated (I recall the GNAA and Bulbasaur FACs, and that's it). In this case, it seems both sides (I include myself in this) got defensive when they perceived that their opinions were under attack (for Francesco, that his writing was poor, and for Tony/Sandy/Me, that the standards we've been applying to FACs for months are faulty). In the end (which occurred after Francesco's initial complaints on WT:FAC), I think pretty much everyone agreed that the article was at least somewhat better than it was when the nomination started. And everyone was much more calm, that's for sure.
As for people disappearing and not striking their objections, yes, that happens, but in my experience Raul usually ignores these after several days if the nominator makes a note under the objection saying that he/she has addressed the objection. Of course, sometimes it doesn't work out that way, especially for nominations receiving few comments.
Nathaniel