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