Building consensus around which fork to use is going to be a high-friction process; it's going to require much more work than pushing the "fork" button and changing the name in all the assets.
I don't think the consensus is really necessary. Right now we live in a world where version control and patch management is still pretty high cost. That leads to fewer active forks of each open source project.
As the technology improves, I expect us to move to a world where each project is actually a cloud of forks. So instead of rebranding every time there's a fork of XYZ software, we just refer to the forks by the name of the maintainer. e.g. I use Chad McProgrammer's XYZ.
It seems like some people want unity and sameness for its own sake, or to enforce their vision of a project on the users. I just want the software to work as close to my ideal as possible, and am willing to shop around maintainers to find the one that I personally consider the best. Why would you compromise if you don't have to?
Building consensus around which fork to use is going to be a high-friction process; it's going to require much more work than pushing the "fork" button and changing the name in all the assets.