I think you are asking why they haven't, not why they have.

Obviously, I can't read their minds but I can take a guess: I don't think they feel that they will have the votes, no matter how it is worded.

Doc, Oz, and A28 voted in favor of it. WHarvey has given hints that he would vote in favor of a revised motion but he also said the wording was "one of the reasons I voted against this motion" which indicates to me that he had other reasons as well. I would have to count him as a "possible" only.

I have seen absolutely nothing from the other TB members which makes me believe that they would support the new motion.

Six "Yes" votes (assuming that at least 8 TB members vote) will be needed to pass the motion.

If I were in either Oz's or A28's shoes right now, I would not second the motion either -- at least not until I saw more support for it.

The motion I most favored when I was on TB was that establishing the Religious Travel Forum. I was hoping it would pass when I made the initial motion for it but it did not. I could have made motion after motion in a vain attempt to get it passed but that would have been a foolish waste of TB's time.

If someone else who had voted for it the first time had made a new motion, I would not have seconded it for the exact same reason.

However, ScottC, who opposed it the first time around, later announced that he had changed his mind. Knowing that with the original 5 votes in favor, and Scott's new opinion, the motion would pass I immediately seconded his motion.

(Interestingly, as it turned out one of the original 5 decided to vote against it, but two others who had originally opposed it also voted for it, thus passing it.)

Right now, I think that Doc's motion would be defeated with either another 3-6 vote or, at best, a 4-5 vote. Hopefully, somewhere along the line more TB members will be convinced that it is an advisable step and then, and only then, would it be sensible to hold a second vote.