Failing to admin a volatile user is not a failure. A volatile user not recognizing the reasons for a delay in granting him additional powers; that is a failure. Weyes's volatility has been proven by his abrupt departure.
Note that several users who voted "oppose" to his admin candidacies also said he'd be a good candidate in the future. There were enough that if they changed their votes, he would have been adminned both times. He also received a lot of compliments for his RC patrol work, even in some oppose votes.
Like it or not, administrators are the "official face" of Wikipedia to the general editing public. Recently, many admins, and even some arbitrators seem to have forgotten this, and have been less civil than is generally expected from someone in such a position. Since de-adminning is near impossible for simple incivility (and incivility among admins is frequently excused by other admins as "part of a tough job"), it is becoming more difficult to become an admin because at least some users want Wikipedia to have an indefatigably friendly face. For some reason, some admins think this push for higher standards is an anti-admin cabal, rather than a legitimate, good faith effort by concerned individuals to improve Wikipedia. If you have a devil in the field, you need a lot more saints surrounding him if you don't want him seen.
Want adminship to be easier to get, and closer to "no big deal"? Be sure that the admins that are in place are always on their best behavior, and *always* admonish those who aren't, even if there isn't any formal punishment. Stop excusing incivility for any reason whatsoever.