Voting is time consuming. It requires infrastructure to be set up (can't get votes from thousands of people by hand). It requires efforts to notify everyone that a vote is occurring (hardly fair if you don't). It requires efforts to actually get them to vote (what, you want a quorum?). It requires a lot of discussion. And of course, it takes time—for each and every voter—to read the arguments and actually vote.
Total it all up, and you're requesting other people to spend at at least a week of time.
On something that was already decided once before. With no actual arguments as to why the status quo should be changed. But with plenty of vitriol, it seems.
You don't particularly have any involvement in either community, with a total of one upvoted question and no answers in each community.
So, I think when you take that all into account, its pretty clear why there is no vote and shouldn't be one as a result of your request for one.
I sit on the board of my HOA. We have five directors. Even we require a second before we hold a vote. Out of a hundred thousand, you don't even have a second in your call for a vote.
Please stop trolling.
Where to vote on merging Ubuntu and Linux?
) is the reason for it being down-voted: it assumes that the practical merging is already at stake, which isn't. i see it as a largely accepted question if rephrased:why not merge (vote to merge)?
. if this question was really bad why would it result in up-voted/interesting answers? having good answers is the best a question can get, even if these answers are not what the author expected. i would edit it (cannot) and not only the title but also remove the updates