On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 8:38 AM, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
I guess you get what you pay for - a number of opposes don't seem to be that weighty (KM's nom on Riana's RfB, the 'not enough participation in RfA' on Avraham's, when he's participated in 80...) and the result will be no new crats. The next time a difficult decision is made because a crat couldn't find someone to discuss an issue with inside the window, we will have only RfB voters to blame.
Nathan
It does seem that people are making entirely too large a deal out of these RfBs -- and as Nathan said, the result will be no new crats. We're getting the blanket "don't need more crats" opposes, which frustrate me the most. What is wrong with having more crats? Doubtless in the future there will be a situation arises that requires us to have more, so why should we be shorthanded?
- GC