Draft
Discussing preference gaps without ranking people
Two people answer separately; a shared summary needs mutual consent.
Original draft for local preview. Human editorial review is still pending; this article is not published in production.
Each participant answers the questionnaire alone. Raw answers are not shown to the other person.
After both finish and consent, six dimension gaps appear as discussion bands, not as a score of who is better.
Either person can revoke consent later. New shared reports stop; private facts stay owned separately.
A dimension gap compares preferences reported in this questionnaire at this time. A similar answer does not guarantee ease, and a wider gap does not prove incompatibility. One person may want to discuss a disagreement immediately while the other needs a pause. A useful agreement can name how to request a pause and when to return, instead of deciding which person is right.
Each participant controls whether to finish and whether to consent to the shared summary. Invite participation without pressure. Discuss one dimension at a time, ask each person what an answer meant in context, and agree on a trial that either can stop. Revoking consent stops access to the shared workflow according to the product's controls; it cannot erase a copy someone previously chose to save. Avoid placing information you do not want another participant to retain into a shared discussion.