I finally got a chance to read your prior articles about "low resistance" governance.
It reminds me of the U.S. Constitution and many aspects of our U.S. system of governance.
One of the things I sometimes point out to my students is that the U.S. system is intentionally non-democratic.
Democracy, in its raw form, simply means that 51% can oppress and subjugate the remaining 49%.
The makeup of the U.S. Senate, both in representation and in their self-adopted 'rules' (e.g. allowing 41% to filibuster and thus stop legislation favored by 59%) are meant to defend the minority viewpoint.
The net effect is that, in the U.S., the simple majority is able to rule relatively unfettered until such time as they try to do something that is overwhelming opposed by the minority. However, this has been undermined in recent years by the Senate relaxing the 'cost' of the filibuster. A few decades ago, a filibuster required at least one Senator be speaking (i.e. 'holding the floor') for the duration of the filibuster. This meant that filibusters were limited to issues with "Very High Resistance" by the minority.
However, when that 'cost' was eliminated and the filibuster became 'easy', the minority party began invoking it for anything and everything they disagreed with. The net result was that the majority party began eliminating the scope of the filibuster. The Democratic-led Senate in 2013 removed the filibuster from judicial confirmations. Then the Republican-led Senate in 2017 removed the filibuster from Supreme Court confirmations.
This brings up the issue of gaming the system. I haven't thought this all the way through, but my gut instinct is that "low resistance" governance can be gamed, especially if other people's votes are known in advance. If I simply wait until I am the last voter, I can calculate what my relative votes need to be on all options in order to make sure my preferred option is chosen.
On a somewhat different note, I am a fan of Single Transferable Vote, because it generally does a good job of achieving genuine consensus. However, even that can be gamed (especially if other voters' votes are known or can be predicted beforehand).