Objective is an absolute and that is why there is a need to make a distinction. Democracy works on a basis of consensus also, but without a cost in risk of making a false confirmation, using the blockchain analogy, it is possible to bend the consensus to your benefit. This is why the democracy in a private company is based on stake, and why stake matters here. With no "skin in the game" you can manipulate the consensus without you suffering the results of the manipulation. This cost is externalised.

Reality, by definition, has no absolutes, because you cannot measure them. Absolutes are limits in mathematics, they take infinite confirmations, infinite processing.

I refer you to of Law and equity, specifically his one "sacrifice is the measure of credibility": if you have nothing to lose, your opinion cannot be credibile. This is where the crime of perjury comes in, your evidence must be tested and if it can be shown you deliberately lie to benefit, it is a very serious crime, up there with murder and rape.