OK, I think both of the two previous Forest Keepers constitutes a pretty effective veto. With voter requirements not even being the leading option in the poll I'm not going to attempt to progress the idea.
I personally have no plans to pursue any embassy closures in the future. I don't feel I need the attendant debate on elitism/exclusivity/how-would-you-feel-if-that-was-Forest-in-the-future/did-we-do-enough-for-them, and I don't see the point if every new region that sends us a friendly telegram continues to get an embassy. I'd hoped to be able to spend less time on embassies rather than more.
There's clearly very little enthusiasm for regional officers vetting embassy applications as a way forward. As I've said, I'm sceptical about having new criteria for applicant regions, though it is the leading poll option. If somebody else wants to develop that into a workable proposal and put it forward then the floor is theirs.
In the absence of consensus, the default position appears to be no change.