I've found that informal consensus, the tautological type you have when you don't label it, is good. This is just what you have when everyone has hashed somethi

I've found that informal consensus, the tautological type you have when you don't label it, is good. This is just what you have when everyone has hashed something out and found a solution that fits. But formal consensus is a horrible thing where you're slowly bullied into dropping your objections to something you don't agree with under the guise of everyone agreeing. It's a nightmare because when you're openly bullied you don't have to get up after and tell everyone how wonderful it feels. I'm okay with being the loser in a vote and to have to do your thing, but to have my thing twisted until I'm told we're all happy. Not. It's a compliance trick. The person running it or most invested in it can pick almost anything they want and the victims of the process are often very ... cult-like ... in defending the decision. Which has to be the case because consensuses are literally never defendable with technical arguments or the argument would have sufficed.