A significant part of work of onchain organizations is to protocolize consensus. This process is roughly as follows:

1. Specify what requires consensus
2. Define it as a parameter
3. Create a governance model for the parameter
4. Make the parameter governance autonomous and automated
5. Experience failure scenarios of consensus
6. Go back to 1

Governance Public Utilities for @zksync at @thezknation

This is different from many traditional organizations, where default consensus is transformed into “a process” (not a protocol) with a “direct individual responsible”

Note the key differences:
1. In onchain organizations, consensus is reduced to a parameter, not a process
2. In onchain organizations, consensus  should be autonomous (not assigned to an individual : team)

that's one approach. i'd like to see a simpler approach that assumes consensus gives members time to veto. so tacit consensus explicit failure