Consensus is important for both taproot and separately for the activation mechanism.  There are more soft-forks that Bitcoin will need, so it is important to achieve positive progress on the activation topic also, not get impatient and rush something ill-considered.  Not all future soft-forks maybe as widely supported as taproot, and yet it could become existentially critical that Bitcoin prevails in achieving a future upgrade in dramatic circumstances, even against powerful interests counter to Bitcoin user and investors interests.  We should treat the activation topic in a considered way and with decorum, provide tight non-emotive reasoning devoid of frustration and impatience.  This is a low drama and convenient time to incrementally improve activation.  People have varied views about the deciding factor, or even which factors resulted in segwit activating after BIP 141 failed using BIP 9.  We do not have to solve everything in one step, incremental improvement is good, for complex unintuitive topics, to learn as we go - and it should not be hard to do less badly than what transpired leading up to BIP 148 and BIP 91.  Failure to upgrade if permanent, or demoralizing to protocol researchers could be a systemic risk in itself as there are more upgrades Bitcoin will need.  We are not Ents but we should use our collective ingenuity to find an incremental improvement for activation.