User talk:HJ Mitchell/Thoughts on WP:V RfC

Comment

Hi HJ. I don't want to comment directly on the conclusion of your draft and, from my reading of it, what I have to say won't affect that anyway.

However, I feel that there is a respect in which what you have written may be unfair, specifically to Blueboar. You say "Putting the two proposals together in one RfC may have been a bad idea..." which, to my mind, presupposes that Blueboar had a wide range of alternatives available to him and chose badly. You will be aware, though, that the RfC was prefaced by discussions about formulating the question, and I think it is clear from these discussions that each side demanded quid-pro-quo (although it is of course possible that they were wrong to do so) in the RfC question in a way that suggests that if an isolated part of the RfC question had been put out there on its own, it would have been regarded as incomplete by sufficient users for it to fail. From this point-of-view I think the RfC question did pretty much the best it could - even if this still may not have been good enough in your view.

Thanks. --FormerIP (talk) 21:34, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

It wasn't intended as a criticism of Blueboar, merely an observation that if the two proposals had been made separately, the second part might have had less opposition than it did in a package including the first part. I'll re-draft it to that effect before I post it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:53, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

• HJ, I do think you need to comment on Sarek's close of this RFC and explain why you propose to overturn it. I also suggest commenting on SlimVirgin's revert of Sarek's close: Was it appropriate for an involved user to do that, and is it right that she should achieve her aim by means of this tactic?—S Marshall T/C 01:35, 13 December 2011 (UTC)