No, I won't sit down, shut up and enjoy the ride.

Really, most other places require consensus and consultation for change. I believe that Erik himself said that in edits relating to Flow. Something along the lines of 

<quote>... We do strive to communicate, solve problems real users have, and resolve conflicts, especially if there are major points of contention. What are the material issues with the deploy at this time?</quote>

So you have
* major points of contention
* no evidence that this fix actually a major point of contention
* communication in a newsletter that points here, but you are not prepared to listen or discuss
* no attempt to resolve a conflict
* a merged change that is predicted to take place where no consultation has taken place
* an opportunity to address matters raised prior to a deployment

Have I missed something from that little list?

Seems more than a technical fix. It appears to be a change planned to be implemented and you are not allowing broader discussion, or the base challenge to your assumptions. The points have been raised, and yet you forge ahead with your decision without an attempt at consensus, or some conciliation. And the history of bugs is that they are discussed in situ, not fobbed off somewhere else where you can ignore them in all their glory.

I would think that it would actually be incumbent on you, those bringing the change forward to mediawiki, to propose and discuss that merged change. But no, instead we hide behind the "technical" barrier. Then expect others to go somewhere and complain "I don't like it." Grow up. The mature adult thing is for me to bring concerns here, to have them reasonably listened to, and to see if we can have a compromise. Seems that the mature approach is not suitable.

If you want that change, you take it out and propose it and defend it. You have identified where it should be discussed, so I look forward to seeing it there. That is basically what I said at the beginning.

If I don't see it there, then I feel that I am justified in reopening this bug until there is what I consider some reasonable conversation about this bug, and means to explore the matters raised.