Timeline for Can two people have a consensus?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 9, 2017 at 0:46 | vote | accept | ktm5124 | ||
| Jan 23, 2017 at 0:58 | history | edited | Lawrence | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added a note of caution.
|
| Jan 23, 2017 at 0:32 | comment | added | ktm5124 | @Lawrence Great answer. I think that 'consensus' is preferable to 'concord' and 'concurrence', as it's more widely known and easier to say. Using the word in such a way makes life easier. As you point out, it may have different connotations when it refers to only two people. It could emphasize the importance of thinking everything through, and addressing all concerns, rather than numerical support for a decision. Perhaps the number of concerns raised is what requires a consensus between two people, instead of a simple agreement. | |
| Jan 23, 2017 at 0:15 | comment | added | Lawrence | @Chris Indeed. However, with just two parties, the issue of 'overwhelming majority' (numerically) takes a back seat to that of having worked through the details. | |
| Jan 23, 2017 at 0:07 | comment | added | Chris Rogers | With a group of 2 you need both people to agree to form consensus otherwise the decision will be inconclusive. | |
| Jan 22, 2017 at 23:30 | history | edited | Lawrence | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Jan 22, 2017 at 23:25 | history | answered | Lawrence | CC BY-SA 3.0 |