[WikiEN-l] Here's an interesting one

[Rob]

This isn't directed at anyone in particular, but a legit question for the
group:

If someone disagrees with a deletion result, then lists it on DRV, this is
generally (with the exception of vanity self-promoters, trolls, and the
like) accepted as a good faith effort to improve the encyclopedia.

If someone disagrees with a keep result, then lists it on DRV, this is seen
by many as an "abuse of process" and an effort to "get the result he
wanted".

It seems that if one type of result can be reviewed and possibly overturned,
what's wrong with reviewing another type of result?  What's the difference?

On 1/30/06, Ryan Delaney <ryan.delaney at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> No, the one he is talking about, who tried to use DRV to overrule a
> no-consensus AFD because it was more likely to get the result he wanted.
> This is a picture-perfect example of how process should NOT be (ab)used.
>