User talk:The Rambling Man/RFC


 * 1) Race to the bottom
 * 2) Over-rigid application of guidelines as policy
 * 3) English variations disregarded
 * 4) Overly detailed
 * 5) Inconsistent reviewing
 * 6) Across FACs
 * 7) Within a single FAC
 * 8) Curious "non-jargon" claims (e.g. the "genus" and "entrepot" arguments)
 * 9) Inconsistent closure
 * 10) Asking supporters to re-support (vs)
 * 11) Asking opposers to re-oppose
 * 12) Unique interpretation of what is "consensus" (9 supports and 2 opposes in any other part of Wikipedia does not equate to "no consensus" to support)
 * 13) Supervoting
 * 14) Using multiple venues to criticise
 * 15) Reviewing style (to "impress" apparently)
 * 16) Points-winning
 * 17) Diverting discussions to supposed "golden era"
 * 18) Reviewers from driving away reviewers
 * 19) Nominations from driving away reviewers (look closer to home)
 * 20) Resulting in
 * 21) Illness (as Tony1 put it, it's making "me mentally ill".
 * 22) Even fewer nominations
 * 23) Even fewer reviewers
 * 24) Conclusion: little wonder FAC is dying a death under the current approach
 * 25) fewer nominations
 * 26) fewer reviewers
 * 27) lack of respect for process
 * 28) It's "OUR WAY" or "NO WAY AT ALL" attitude clearly evident in just about every discussion thread
 * 29) "Have fun reinforcing each other's self-perceived righteousness."