"

 Intent paragraph 

SmokeyJoe, please explain the deletion of the ""intent"" paragraph:

The intent of this essay is to remind RM closers that finding consensus in favor of a move not clearly supported by a strong majority of the participants in the RM discussion is within the closer's discretion as long as the support arguments are stronger in terms of policy basis, and to encourage taking advantage of this policy-supported discretion especially when the certain conditions listed below are present. This essay provides RM closers with a convenient way to explain their reasoning in these situations by referencing this essay, and also allows involved editors to cite the essay as applicable when appropriate.  This should help resolve certain title conflicts sooner than they would otherwise be resolved.

What exactly is your objection to this?  Let's break it up into key separate statements, if you don't mind.

 finding consensus in favor of a move not clearly supported by a strong majority of the participants in the RM discussion is within the closer's discretion as long as the support arguments are stronger in terms of policy basis
 encourage taking advantage of this policy-supported discretion especially when the certain conditions listed below are present.
 This essay provides RM closers with a convenient way to explain their reasoning in these situations by referencing this essay
 allows involved editors to cite the essay as applicable when appropriate
 This should help resolve certain title conflicts sooner than they would otherwise be resolved.

Which statements are problematic for you, and why?  Thanks.  2C "