In other forms of shared decision making (autocracy, hierarchy, voting) we can complain and know that we wouldn't really have the power to stop decisions. And if we had the power in these forms of decision making, we could just shut people up and hope and see to it that compliance would solve it.
In consent-based decision making, that is not possible anymore. We can withdraw consent.
**Objection and proposal**
Consent-decision making means 2 things:
1. I can object - and my objection triggers a "Now what?" - implying 2. a proposal to change the original proposal.
This means Consent as a constraint: we are not allowed to proceed unless we take care of the objection first.
This creates new challenges, because - we need to be in touch with what is really important to us - we need to know when the decision affects us and when it doesn't - we also need to understand what is still in the range of our tolerance and accept that some things might be good enough, even if they don't have our preference - we need to speak up