I disagree with that mindset; it is how white elephants in the room get entrenched.
Simply because we get tired of seeing an opinion tendered, does not mean we get to mandate that the holders of those opinions be silent. Taken to an extreme, that kind of thinking is what oppressive regimes think about their subjects demanding equitable treatment and "rights."
On ethical grounds, I simply cannot endorse such a resolution. People *are* entitled to their opinions.
Instead, I would tender the following alternative:
We accept that we have opinions on what we would like to see, and on how the game should progress in terms of development; however, *WE ARE NOT THE GAME'S CREATORS*. As such, while we are entitled to our opinions, the only choice we actually have is to play it, or not to play it. We have no power to compel toady or three-toe to do or change anything, and if we did, it would be unconsionable to exercise such a power. Toady and Three-toe are not slaves, and under no obligations to give us anything at all; such a compulsion would take away that natural right, and is reprehensible in the fullest. Dwarf fortress was and is developed for THEIR pleasure, not ours. As such, we should agree that it is simply out of line to try to tell toady his business, and in that light, should agree that we will undertake no venture or enterprise to enact such a compulsion. (Trying to steal executive authority by "putting to a vote", or trying to bribe or coerce with a kickstarter, or other such action. We have no authority to even propose such an action; we should agree never to try.)
However, the flipside is that if an OPINION thread is created, it should be allowed, no matter how tired, worn, and innately impotent such opinions are. If we respect Toady's executive authority on his own work, and the sanctity of his opinions and choices, we should do so for ourselves and each other too. If we bind ourselves in taboos and "unspoken rules", we become a degnerate, unfriendly culture. What would that say about us?