Rough consensus is a term used in consensus decision-making to describe the general feeling of a group about a specific matter. It is achieved when all issues are addressed, but not necessarily accommodated.
We see this is a problem... moving on.
It's okay to move forward with a solution that may not be the best choice for everyone or even the majority.
Speculation would indicate a small percentage would win over the vast majority.
Rough consensus relies on distinguishing between two types of objections: "Not the best choice" and "fundamental flaws".
Lack of disagreement is more important than agreement
For example, five people for and one hundred people against might still be rough consensus.
Rough consensus is, in my opinion, fundamentally flawed; and can lead to a hierarchy, which may include kings.
So the choice is clear. Queens only.
This is how you get dictatorship and cults.
Consensus is when the group agrees
... well, how do you know unless you vote? At least in some form.
[***The humming aspect just fits in with - yesterday + day before]
Since the goal of the rough consensus is to arrive to a lack of strong disagreement, which is different from reaching agreement, or from choosing the majority view... it would seem that it's a matter of accommodation for me and not you.
Conclusion: well gee, it sounded good, but we didn't think it through.