Currently, and most likely for a long time coming, there has been a lot of discussion around if there should be changes made to Classic. Two groups of people seemed to have emerged from this discussion, one group saying there should be no changes made ever and another saying there should be some changes. The group of individuals who say there should be changes have a very wide array of ideas of what should be changed for Classic and seem to lack any consistencies in what they believe should be changed.
This seems to be a very counter productive conversation, and highly toxic. Granted, any conversation on the internet leans in that direction. There are two truths that will have to be accepted by both groups when it comes to this discussion. The first one being that there will be changes to Classic. If Blizzard can fix a bug, or head off a problem from the past that caused server instability, or reduce lag, they will. Which I think is totally fair and reasonable changes, no one wants a buggy mess that isn't playable. I don't think many people will argue against these changes. However, that by definition is a change to Vanilla, which is a reality no one can escape.
The second is that this project isn't meant to be a Vanilla 2.0, there are a lot of features that are not acceptable changes to make to the game. LFD, LFR, transmog, features of that nature cannot be added to the game. They will absolutely destroy the experience of Vanilla.
So, in hopes of helping create a more productive debate my question to the community is this. What are changes that the team can make to the game that are acceptable?
Personally speaking, I believe that bug fixes, server stability, lag reduction are all acceptable changes. Outside of that the only changes I would argue for are the spec viability. Every spec in the game should be usable instead of 1 in 3. Now what changes that would actually require, I can't say. Outside of those changes, I say leave the game alone.