yet lk is claiming that there is a consensus of opinion see below this is extraordinary revisionist definition of consensus with regard to the rfc should this page discuss only right libertarianism the conclusion has been stated thus the consensus was libertarianism should be broadly construed to include all significant viewpoints from reliable sources the definition of consensus is defined in english as firstly general agreement and secondly group solidarity of belief or sentiment wikipaedia's own definition goes on to declare that the formal process of achieving consensus ideally requires serious treatment of the considered opinion of each group member those advocating the adoption say of a particular course of action genuinely wish to hear those who may be against the proposal since discussion it is supposed can only enhance ultimate consensus the hope is that in such circumstances action or the adoption of group opinion without resolution of dissent will be rare the dispute has not been resolved in any way there has been little read no compromise by the parties on either side of the dispute the parties on both sides of the dispute remain as intransigent as ever no consensus has been achieve on this issue why has consensus been claimed in regards to such a polemic issue when no such consensus exists