And did you think I didn't see the comment in the other article, averring that "consensed" was a word used in some cultural groups? What groups would those be: The Doubletalkers? The Obfuscators? The lexicographically challenged? Are you making policy for your clique alone, or for the broad public to read and understand? If the latter, then shouldn't you make an effort to use words that are in broad, common use, and not recently coined by certain "cultural groups"? Do you not understand that language is a shared agreement, and that you limit your readership by using coindages that are not undisputed elements of that agreement? Do you not understand that the use of jargon, "in" terms, and other obscurities is an EXCLUSIONARY, not an INCLUSIONARY action? Are you saying, "it is OK to post here as long as we like you, but if we don't, if you're not one of us, you won't even be fully able to understand our editorial policy?"

Are you "talkin 'bout your generation"? Is your position, "Don't try to dig what we all say???" Would be surprised if the general reaction is, "meet the new boss, same as the old boss: we won't get fooled again"?