Consensus Can Change
A small group of editors can reach a consensual decision, but when the article gains wider attention, others may then disagree. The original group should not block further change on grounds that they already have made a decision.
...
Wikipedia's decisions are ever-changing, because new people visit every day, and through new information and new ideas, we may gain insights we did not have previously. It is important that there is a way to challenge past decisions, however these decisions were reached. Decisions should therefore practically never be "binding" in the sense that the decision cannot be taken back.
(Emphasis added)

Also see the flowchart at that page, particularly the first two boxes. I came across the article that was in a previous consensus, and made a change. That should not, no, can not be considered vandalism.  (talk|Contribs)

Furthermore, I'm not actually convinced consensus has been reached here, with regard to the port/spinoff/version/other-term debate. From what I can tell by going through all the comments here,  strongly believes that "spinoff" is the only acceptable term;  "isn't sure" but believes "port" is definitely not the right term, and leans slightly toward "other versions"; , , and at least one unsigned comment all believe that "spinoff" is not appropriate and that "version" should be chosen as, while less specific, is not inaccurate by any interpretation;  supports "spinoff" but feels there might be some other, better term nobody has thought of;  believes that a variety of terms should be used;  votes for "spinoff."

So out of eight contributors, we have one very strong supporter of "spinoff", two more moderate supporters of "spinoff", three supporters of "version" (and one "slight support") and one supporter of "all of the above."

So I have two questions,
Have I summarized everyone's position accurately?
Is there really a consensus here? (I don't think there is, yet)
 (talk|Contribs)