So, the Wikipediots try to "nutshell" the closed discussion.
The greatest support (by about a 35% margin) was for the opening statement that prioritized
quality of content as being far more important than worrying about the provenance of
paid content.
But, the Wikipediots decide that the statement with the most votes should be mentioned... (wait for it)...
at the very end of the nutshell!
I tried quickly to restructure the nutshell, so that fewer readers would be confused about the actual outcome of opinion about paid editing.
But, I am promptly reverted by some dip-wad who
comments emphatically back to me:
QUOTE
(not sure why this should be given prominence and mentioned twice; the flow of the statement is summary; opposition; support)
So, this editor looked at the evidence, looked at my attempt to balance it more proportionately, then decided
NOPE! -- we're going to emphasize the minority opposition, and bury the majority support down in the dregs of the wall of words.
Nice freakin' nutshell, Wikipediots. In my estimation, these kind of nuts can go to hell in their nutshell, for all I care.
(I recommend a wheel war to resolve this issue. Who's "got my back", Jayjg style?)