That was really disappointing.

If this whole Stack Exchange thing is going to be community-driven, then one and only one rule should apply to site proposals: if one of them can fulfill the requirements and clearly show a good community would follow it, then it should be opened, no matter how silly the SE staff thinks it could be.

The only exception to this policy could be is something is blatantly offensive and/or illegal... but this was definitely not the case.

Update:

I don't know who voted to close this questions as "noise or pointless", but I really don't think a discussion about

• what can and can not be done in Stack Exchange,
• whether having some fun is permitted here or severely censored,
• and why a site proposal which had gained enough followers to made it halfway the commitment phase has been abruptly closed

can be considered "pointless" at all.

That was really disappointing.

If this whole Stack Exchange thing is going to be community-driven, then one and only one rule should apply to site proposals: if one of them can fulfill the requirements and clearly show a good community would follow it, then it should be opened, no matter how silly the SE staff thinks it could be.

The only exception to this policy could be is something is blatantly offensive and/or illegal... but this was definitely not the case.

I don't know who voted to close this questions as "noise or pointless", but I really don't think a discussion about

• what can and can not be done in Stack Exchange,
• whether having some fun is permitted here or severely censored,
• and why a site proposal which had gained enough followers to made it halfway the commitment phase has been abruptly closed

can be considered "pointless" at all.

That was really disappointing.

If this whole Stack Exchange thing is going to be community-driven, then one and only one rule should apply to site proposals: if one of them can fulfill the requirements and clearly show a good community would follow it, then it should be opened, no matter how silly the SE staff thinks it could be.

The only exception to this policy could be is something is blatantly offensive and/or illegal... but this was definitely not the case.

That was really disappointing.

If this whole Stack Exchange thing is going to be community-driven, then one and only one rule should apply to site proposals: if one of them can fulfill the requirements and clearly show a good community would follow it, then it should be opened, no matter how silly the SE staff thinks it could be.

The only exception to this policy could be is something is blatantly offensive and/or illegal... but this was definitely not the case.

Update:

I don't know who voted to close this questions as "noise or pointless", but I really don't think a discussion about

• what can and can not be done in Stack Exchange,
• whether having some fun is permitted here or severely censored,
• and why a site proposal which had gained enough followers to made it halfway the commitment phase has been abruptly closed

can be considered "pointless" at all.

That was really disappointing.

That was really disappointing.

If this whole Stack Exchange thing is going to be community-driven, then one and only one rule should apply to site proposals: if one of them can fulfill the requirements and clearly show a good community would follow it, then it should be opened, no matter how silly the SE staff thinks it could be.

The only exception to this policy could be is something is blatantly offensive and/or illegal... but this was definitely not the case.