Let’s say Starfleet1 was considering a policy change that would prohibit Vulcans2 from serving in its ranks.3 Should this decision be made “methodically, carefully, slowly”, or is it easy to reverse?
Does this consume valuable and irreplaceable resources? It will have some cost to implement, but nothing that would preclude later reversal.
Can you identify a set of stopping rules? Missed recruiting targets, degraded morale, reduced unit cohesion. There are objective and subjective metrics that could trigger a reversal if the facts don’t match the hypothesized benefits.
These answers suggest the change might be a two-way door, but what about: Is there near certainty people won’t be harmed? Most certainly not. In fact, it’s obvious the proposal will be scary and disruptive to a number of Vulcans as well as their friends, family, and colleagues. At the very least there’s enough potential for harm to justify more than a two-tweet cost-benefit analysis.