On 7/14/05, Poor, Edmund W <Edmund.W.Poor(a)abc.com> wrote:
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?
Ed Poor
Bureaucrat
Yes.
He's currently on revert probation from the Arbitration Committee. If
that's "irrelevant" and not a significant objection, I don't think
there are any valid significant objections to anything anywhere on
Wikipedia.
If the revert probation is unfair or incorrect, he should petition to
have that removed first.
--
Michael Turley
User:Unfocused