On 4/10/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
And never mind the actual question RFA is supposed to answer.
RfA is the way we gauge how the community feels about promoting a certain person to adminship. That is what it is. It works on consensus, just like other processes on wikipedia. The community decides.
If you wish to justify this decision you can use one of two arguments: either A) consensus to promote was reached this time, or B) RfA shouldn't work on consensus, but on the opinion of the bureaucrats.
I think it is clear that A wasn't fulfilled. When more 100+ opposes something (and they aren't just morons, look at that list, there's plenty of great, great wikipedians there), that's not consensus. If you think it is, you don't know what consensus means.
And if you agree with B, well then... I don't know what to tell ya. It's one of wikipedia's core principles, so far it has been the way we run this big hunk of a website of ours. When there is such a strong opposition within the community to a decision, then we don't make that decision. Regardless of your own opinion, you should accept that.
Of course, the bureaucrats aren't beancounters, they are supposed to look at the arguments, both for and against. Some of the arguments against are undoubtedly silly (the OFFICE policy, the fact that Cyde nominated him, ...) but there is a whole lot of them that aren't. Valid arguments, voiced by some of the most respected members of our community.
David, try to disregard your own personal feelings in this case, and look on this as a cold, emotionless calculating machine. Do you think this decision was fair? Do you really think that the voices of all those who opposed should be ignored, just because they're (in your opinion) "morons"? If you use reason, and disregard the "of course Danny should be an admin" gut feeling (that can be your opinion of course, but it doesn't allow you to go against consensus), then I think the decision is clear.
--Oskar
PS. I realize that the mailing list doesn't follow the same rules as wikipedia, but please refrain from calling people "morons". We don't just have WP:NPA because it makes editing easier, we have it because personal attacks are extremely insulting and uncivil. Please refrain from using them in the future.