Board Thread:Inclusion debates/@comment-26285319-20150407171302/@comment-188432-20150603172150

What Shambala108 is saying is that T:POINT prohibits "opening up discussions that are materially the same as other, concluded discussions". The rule goes on to say, "You may open up discussions on matters that have already been decided only when you have arguments which have not formed a part of that discussion, or other, precedent discussions on the same topic."

I've let this argument run for way longer than it needed to, in the hopes that it would eventually shake a new argument from the trees. But it really hasn't, and I think Shambala108 and Tangerineduel would agree with me. There are no new products out on the market since our last discussion in 2012. This whole argument is simply a rehash of several earlier discussions.

The reason we have this rule is not to stifle debate. Obviously this one has been both fulsome and exhaustive. Rather, it's to recognise that new fans of Doctor Who are born every day. New people come along every year and become interested in topics that older fans have already throughly explored. If we didn't have a mechanism in place that allowed us to call a halt to these kind of repetitive discussions, we'd have a lot of them floating around without resolution. And since our discussions in The Panopticon are for the purpose of deciding policy — not merely having a good ol' fan chinwag — it's really important that we be able to come to the point.

And so, finding no new facts here, I close this thread and declare that Forum:Versions of Shada (again) in concert with Forum:Are deleted scenes canon? remain in force, with the order or precedence being:
 * Shada (webcast) is the top level version. Thus Shada is essentially an Eighth Doctor/Romana II/K9 Mk II story.
 * with the following alternates of decreasing importance, but all are invalid where they contradict with the webcast


 * Shada (audio story)
 * Shada (novelisation)
 * with the following versions not at all valid sources, which can only be referred to in behind the scenes sections of articles


 * Shada (TV story)
 * the script (book) of Shada

Thanks to all who contributed to this lively debate.