Daniel-
Since when have we started voting on a specific proposal without discussing that specific proposal first?
Countless times. In fact most policy pages were created that way -- the policy page is written, then the talk page contains a listing of supporters, opponents and arguments. People switch from supporter to opponent as they read the arguments. There have been plenty of "this or that article" votes (e.g. Adam Carr's Mother Teresa rewrite), and the selection of options for a poll in itself constitutes a proposal; many polls were set up with no discussion of the options whatsoever.
There's no reason to be too paranoid about votes or, more accurately, polls, as you can change your opinion at any given time. There's good reason to delay the voting process for deletion in particular as it is such a drastic action that is not easily reverted. But in this case I find your reaction disturbingly dramatic and not rooted in precedent.
However, this discussion reminds me that we need a more clearly defined general decision making process. Sadly, Jimbo seems to think that no such thing is necessary.
Regards,
Erik