Well... I think its strange to put some code in, just in case there is a bug in the scripting engine.
Methinks you worry too much?
Well... Mebelieves is probably more apropriate.
I'm always happy to learn, but I am cautious of mythology...
I didn't see any authoritative references offered above in support of this practice.
I can find plenty refuting it and even more who are confused about it...
And there are plenty of structures where it will do nothing at all because there are references to the object elsewhere.

Referring to post #7 there are two reasons given for the practice. Regarding the first, see my opening statement. Regarding the second, it is patently untrue I'm afraid: Custom Class Objects and Objects that are instantiated with a New statement do not need to be explicitly deallocated with a Set to Nothing line. They are managed in the same way as any other object again, by counting referrences. And, depending on their archiatecture, it could give the misleading impression that they have been released when they have not.

So, to be honest, I don't accept either as a valid reason.