Seeing how a few detractors here have been throwing around the term
"groupthink" I have to ask, is there any real difference between the
two or does it depend on which side of a "consensus" decision you are
on? That is, if an article you wrote/are involved with survives AFD,
then it's "consensus", if it gets deleted, it's "groupthink".
Of
course it's the other way around if it's an article you don't like.
Same with an edit to an active article. If the edit stands, it's
"consensus" if it's constantly reverted and your persistence gets you
banned by a "rogue admin (tm)", it's "groupthink".
Therefore, I have to wonder if "groupthink", as long as it doesn't
lead to an [[Abilene paradox]] might not just be another way of saying
"consensus" which can either be good or bad. Good if the "consensus"
decision squares with previously established policies, bad if it
doesn't.