Ok firstly this completely disproves your assertions that you value the laymen:
Consensus can mean something like “a strong majority when the participants are weighted for expertise and/or strength of argument.” As an example, if four experts strongly agree to something and provide strong arguments for it, but five laymen merely state that they oppose the proposal, then the proposal would in most cases be said to have consensus. However, if four experts present strong arguments for a proposal, and three experts present equally strong arguments against it, then it would probably not be said to have consensus. This is commonly the way that technical decisions are made in open source projects, including many Bitcoin open source projects.
Secondly you clearly haven’t read or traversed Nash’s works and so you have perfectly shown you are willing to criticize what you haven’t read. “Ideal Money” is NOT a inquiry in how to optimize a medium of exchange and its properties. You couldn’t have more perfectly made my point in regard to willful ignorance and the perpetuation of the cypherpunk agenda.