General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution

Much of the previous discussion concerning POTM messages seems to be concerning 2 or 3 of NosyNed's nominations in the "December, 2005, Posts of the Month" topic: Message 57, nominating Schrafinator. Message 58, nominating NotSoBlindFaith. Message 59, nominating The Golfer.-----While much can be said for having only a single nomination and no secondings, my impressions of the past are that only particularly great messages get "seconds". The vast majority do not. As such, "seconds" may function well to point out truly exceptional messages. I agree.I'm not sure if the The Golfer nomination of message 59 has been controversial, but it is well outside of being a normal POTM. My impression (non-admin mode) is that The Golfer has done a lot of effort in that topic, in citing and using quality scientific references, in the course of doing an epic "snow job". I wonder if, to those of the creation side, it looks like The Golfer is putting up a masterful scientific argument? To me, it looks like he is just putting out a tremendous amount of irrelivent data. But all this is perhaps something that should be a topic of its own.Moose