Poor, Edmund W (Edmund.W.Poor(a)abc.com) [050715 02:53]:
I'm thinking of deciding this one myself.
Dr. William M. Connolley can be trusted not to abuse admin powers, and
it's not supposed to be a big deal. He got 70% to 30%, but a lot of the
objections were irrelevant in my opinion.
I had objected vociferously at first (go ahead, look it up ;-) but Erik
(user:Eloquence) convinced me to change my vote to neutral. I have been
reading the comment stream, and now I feel I should take matters into my
own hands.
Any objections?
70-30 is good but not quite there. Almost anyone with a score like that
makes it through the next time. I think this is a "when in doubt, do
nothing" case.
Someone will renominate him in a month or two and he'll be a shoo-in.
- d.