[WikiEN-l] Analysis of Request for Adminship

[charles matthews]

Well, perhaps this was not well done at RfA in the particular case.  But the 
argument given is strange and pedantic, really.  To take

"If the nominee fulfills these criteria, then it is Wiki policy that
that person should be granted administrator access"

as the basis of an argument is pedantically strange.  Does that mean that 
anyone who votes against is somehow breaching policy?  Or even that anyone 
who fails to vote for is going against policy?  I'm not a great fan of RfA 
votes, but the voting is a rough way of _determining_ who is trusted. 
Arguing that if you are in some abstract sense trusted then people have to 
vote for you is odd.

Charles