This is true. People are likely being Delphi’d directly or indirectly when their public meeting is divided into groups with a facilitator who appears to be recording the ideas brought up in a brainstorming session. It’s in the categorizing, labeling, and subtle combining or dropping ideas that the magic occurs.
The group will probably be asked to agree with these edits. It seems participatory and above-board, but you are correct that the outcome or a range of acceptable outcomes has been predetermined.
Most of the participants will feel a democratic process has occurred, some will feel a vague unease, and detractors will be targeted, personalized and polarized in the Alinsky style. Beware the word consensus. Usually it is anything but.
My experience in public school administration is that the label Delphi is not used. This process goes under the euphemisms of communication skills, or decision-making process.
I have also seen this used by churches, and purpose-driven type programs, where the apparent goal (develop mission statement, ascertain spiritual gifts) is not the real goal ($$, what else?)
Liberals, when they know they're losing the debate, will turn to name calling or personal attacks. For example, you don't like tax increases. "You're a racist if you don't like obomas economic policies!" Stick to the subject, the negative affects of taxes, and politely agree to discuss racial issues next or at another time. Never lose your cool. Eventually, the liberals call you a name and leave. You win.
Good description of the process.
You said “Beware the word consensus”. True.
Also, beware of the word “conversation”(step 1).
I know of an organization that teaches the process to public agencies and I have seen it used twice. The groups it is used on don’t have a clue what is happening.