I like it. You draw nice fine lines between maths and sorcery, technology and free will. The prospect of having certain feedback loops that can compel you to think in certain ways is terrifying enough, but the notion of doing it to obliterate different opinions is so very topical to certain aspects of the voting systems many countries use now. Would they be able to recognize that they did not agree with their own consensus after the fact, or would that imprint stay with them? Could they face the scorn of an outraged public after consensus ended?