On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Nathan <nawrich(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Oops, left out Neil. I'm not sure I agree with
Ryan P.'s rationale for
withdrawing, and I think for his own sake RyanGerbil should probably have
let it run a little longer. By withdrawing them so quickly after they were
filed, it makes the nom seem spurious and not well thought out - and also
gives the appearance that the admins can't handle criticism. I don't know
that this is actually the case, but the appearance will cause difficulty
any future RfB noms for these folks. Majorly... Well, I think given the
trend in that RfB withdrawal was probably a good idea.
[[User:Neil]] is also running, bringing the total to five.
I confess, I'm a little disappointed at how quickly some of the
have withdrawn. Does anyone else feel similarly?
I agree with you partially. I don't really see a reason why a candidate
would not let their RfA or RfB run its full course, even if it seems clear
that it would not pass. First, I've seen many debates where the tide
completely shifts towards the end; and second, it's a chance for good,
constructive criticism, which is something that no one should pass up on. If
a candidate withdraws early, not only does it make the nom seem spurious,
but it gives an impression of caring more about preserving a positive
percentage in case they decide to run again in the future.