Thank you, I am pleased that you comment.

Some of the questions cannot be given the hours of consideration necessary to actually relegate to them a specific ranking, and due to incomplete information and understanding I can't make a decision between midgrade scoring with absolute confidence. There's things I reckon necessary, things I reckon intolerable, and a grade or two in between at the level of consideration I am willing to undertake without objection.

Well, it's about distinguishing which questions don't need deeper reflection and which do, isn't it? If I don't even know that, I don't even need to talk about consensus.

Some of the questions cannot be given the hours of consideration necessary to actually relegate to them a specific ranking

If you already realise that it would be necessary to give further thought and you don't, then I would think that you are deciding against your better judgement

due to incomplete information and understanding I can't make a decision between midgrade scoring with absolute confidence.

incomplete information

Everyone decides on the measure at which they have obtained sufficient information for themselves, how else? When that information measure is individually reached, the decision is made and it cannot be absolute for that reason, because there is no end point at which one has ALL the information about a subject.
Absolute certainty is impossible and therefore relative certainty is signalled by the averages, I think this is very logically constructed.

incomplete understanding

Everyone knows when they have understood or think they have understood a subject and this is also the moment when they decide, and the averages are helpful for precisely this reason. Because when I decide that I know enough and have understood enough, I can use the median (as an expression of "enough". Where a 4 points towards less resistance and a 6 points towards more resistance, for example.

If we are talking about an emergency, I act on discretion, then it is just that my action or decision is spontaneous. That is the nature of an emergency. But where I do not have an emergency and it is a question of non emergency, one sets a joint time limit within which a choice is going to happen. For this purpose, the introduction of proposals according to this method would be useful and feasible.

The real trap is when it is pretended to be an emergency. Very few situations in life are real emergencies. Faking an emergency or putting in an artificial hurry, that is a trap.

There's things I reckon necessary, things I reckon intolerable, and a grade or two in between at the level of consideration I am willing to undertake without objection.

Things you consider necessary, for example, get a (lower) resistance score of 0-3, things you consider unacceptable get a (higher) resistance score of 8-10 and everything in between reflects the intermediate values. The method merely makes visible in numbers what people do anyway as individuals without nailing it down on numbers.

This is the case with almost all consensus decisions we face in life. We have shit to do, and we can't wrangle over the myriad details and reasons

I don't accept the argument that we got shit to do, rather I would say that it is exactly this statement that likes to be built up in a pressure-filled way with slogans like "we have to act NOW!" or "there is enough to do, we can't wait." If you say so, you must prove it to me.

This method is like everything else, a reduction of complexity in order to offer a selection of conceivable alternatives from the myriad of details and reasons, no more and no less.

If you put it in direct comparison with majority decisions, which only focus on the absolute values "yes or no" to apply, the systemic method wins for me. The majority decision does what you criticised, it demands something absolute that essentially can't be done. It creates artificial fame on the "likes position" and it creates enmity on the "dislikes position".

So far I am not convinced by your critique because it is not well-founded enough and I should be able to see or recognise that you are testing the method first for yourself.

Those who don't want something find reasons, those who want something find ways.
If you don't want to find a way to test and try the method, I need not use any further arguments.

For the rest of your response I need some more time to answer it.