This may have some sense only, if clear guidelines what is *not* allowed in package, would be prepared. Otherwise, packages with many influential people biased against them (batterypatch is good example here - heck, I'm also biased against it ) and/or bad fame, could get removed/harassed without thorough testing of actual state.

As said, I'm not fan of packages like speedpatch/batterypatch, but just like MentalistTraceur, I'm not sure about their actual state. Also, people tend to mix battery patch and speedpatch into one thing (AFAIK, only one of them does overclocking - 2nd is wrong [as in useless], but not harmful, either).

I certainly *don't* want to see packages removed, without good report about what serious and obligatory rules they've broken - especially, after perceiving first hand, how "objective" some people in tech staff are.

That, for example, is very bad reason to remove package - it should result in kindly asking maintainer to fix packaging, at most. Otherwise, we should remove 1/3 of extras, including some really good things from various "community heroes" here.

/Estel