2009/2/23 Anthony <wikimail(a)inbox.org>rg>:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Thomas Dalton
The discussion has to
take place somewhere, meta seems the best option (the only obvious
alternative is to have closure discussions on the project in question,
but that would most likely result in few people from other projects
being involved, which is a bad thing).
Why is that a bad thing? Why should people not involved in a project be
involved in deciding whether or not the project should exist?
Because people involved in the project are almost certainly in favour
of the project remaining. If they didn't think it should exist, they
wouldn't be involved in it. If you want to get a balanced discussion,
you need wider suffrage. Restricting discussion to just that project
is equivalent to a rule that active projects are never shut down
(there is certainly an argument for such a rule, but that's a
discussion for another day).