Yopasepeor, in your own interest, I suggest you listen when Mateusz explains these things to you. (Or for that matter, all the others who had reservations about your proposal). He is a respected member of the community, and especially when it comes to tagging schemas, the proposal process and how the community works in general, he knows what he is talking about.
Your behavior comes across as childish and borderline abusive. Having followed your conduct and the constant attacks on people who tried to work with you (and who kept being much too nice, IMO) on your proposal in good faith in that other thread, TBH I completely gave up on this.
From my point of view, your proposal was doomed from the start, largely because of the way you interact with people. Your undiscussed and now to-be-reverted mass edit(s?) you made and the subsequent unreasonableness you held about it already seemed like a red flag.
If you want to pursue this further, it’s up to you to turn that around. Reverting the mass edits yourself rather than leaving it to others to clean it up would be an important gesture, in my opinion.
Also, for a second proposal, use short, concise wording and provide reasons for every change proposed, considering how the data is surveyed and used. Split up your proposal into atomic parts.