On 6/15/07, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
I'd generally tend more to say "Anyone who cannot accept that consensus could conceivably change on anything, any day, and that no decisions are final, probably is working on the wrong project." Don't necessarily like that sometimes, but I really don't see it being changed or [[Wikipedia:Binding decisions]] getting made into policy anytime very soon.
The idea that the recent Daniel Brandt deletion resembles anything like a changed consensus is, frankly, absurd. It was nothing but deletion by attrition and broken process.
Perhaps the article should have been deleted, perhaps not. But those who proudly point to the Brandt AfD as a sign of policy maturity are misguided; indeed, the Brandt deletion wars only showcase some of the fundamentally mistaken assumptions in the AfD process.
The most serious one among these is: a single person should be the final arbiter of something that hundreds of community members have debated for weeks. Contentious AfDs should _always_ be closed in a more deliberate process involving a small group of trusted editors who are _not_ self-selected.