John Lee wrote:
I also realised, from looking at other comments made on that RfA, and from reading the opinions of people in present-day RfAs, that this philosophy isn't one adopted by many. People look for reasons to oppose, even if they don't have much to do with harm. For example, why should writing an FA or not doing enough vandalfighting be impediments to adminship? This is not evidence that the candidate will do harm with the tools, or that by approving the candidate, we will be harming Wikipedia.
I'm not sure that this is actually a philosophy that's good for the project anymore. We have a number of them that are probably antiquated and should be tossed by the wayside, but won't be.
-Jeff