Sometimes as a Wikipedian you may want your opinion to count, in the sense that it should play a part in the process of forming consensus, but you have reservations about the processes that are used in a given instance. For instance, you may notice that the decision appears to be made on a straight vote. If so, then this appearance is wrong – no decision on Wikipedia is made on a straight vote, and people who attempt to do so should be troutwhacked.
There is no reason to feel disenfranchised simply because you don't like the way things appear to be done. At the same time it would be disruptive to Wikipedia to try to force change. But there is an alternative. Usually there is an area for discussion or comments in any decision-making process. If there isn't, make one or use the talk page. Indicate your intention to be heard without being counted as a kind of vote, and that your opinion matters even if it isn't part of a numeric tally. One way to do this would be to cite this page and then state your opinion, followed by your signature. For instance:
[[Wikipedia:Consensus not numbers]]: I think Martin has a good point here, but overall I'd be inclined to support the new policy proposal because it would keep our processes simple. Instruction creep is a bugbear to be avoided, and this simple proposal would not adversely affect our decision-making processes. --~~~~