Editing Consumerium:Consensus

''Part of the [[Consumerium:intermediate page format]] for [[Research Wiki]].''  

The [[Consumerium]] '''Consensus''' on a given [[product]] or [[service]] which is unambiguosly identified by [[barcode]], [[RFID]] or other signal or identifier, indicates the ''undisputed'' facts about the product.

The word ''fact'' implies that they have been verified, and attributed at least to some [[faction]] that can be responsible for what they say (e.g. to take the heat for it off [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] in case of a [[lawsuit]]).  It does not imply that what is said is ''true'' or that anyone likes it.  It implies that some group takes responsibility for stating it and no other group has taken responsibility for disputing it.  That's all it means.

Like all facts, it has to be subject to some conceivable form of [[disproof]] to be accepted as a fact.  That is, there must be some known way to dispute and remove the fact, attribute it ''only'' to one [[faction]], or otherwise make a statement that it is only one group's opinion.  

:If it is, it appears only as [[Consumerium:Criticisms of X]] or [[Consumerium:Praise for X]] which might be reduced to a [[score]] for purposes of the [[Consumerium buying signal]] and only appear in detail for those with appropriate [[access device]]s, i.e. not a [[worn device]] where display space is limited.

If disputing facts is too easy, [[funded troll]]s from bad companies will pour in, dispute everything bad, and there will be no negative facts no matter how bad a company or person is.  If disputing facts is too hard, there will be lawsuits against the [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] for publishing [[libel pit]] or [[echo chamber]] comments.  Projects like [[Wikipedia]] face these all the time, and they are not directly threatening to anyone's business, as Consumerium will be.  So striking this balance and having a clear idea of what '''consensus''' is matters a great deal.  Our [[wiki management]] will mostly be about this.

So, what is the [[consensus]] between [[faction]]s?  It is what none of them choose to risk their credibility to dispute.  If there is [[revert currency]] it is what none of them have [[bet]] it on by reverting.  If there is only an informal system, it is what they are willing to let the outside world sue them for (unless the [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] assumes this risk which seems unwise).

''There is lots written on [[w:consensus]], [[w:consensus democracy]] and [[w:consensus decision making]].  This is best reviewed in depth before making any more comments here.''