Estlund's Epistemic Proceduralism

In his article “Epistemic Proceduralism,(citation)” Estlund argues that there is an epistemic value that allows the discovery of truth, specifically that the authority or legitimacy of decisions and laws do not depend on whether or not they are correct, but rather the epistemic value which addresses whether or not it is a good decision. Before he introduces his theory, Estlund introduces the underlying theories which he incorporates into his own, namely the correctness theory and proceduralism.
First, Estlund briefly touches upon proceduralism. The theory states that as long as the procedure is adhered to, whatever the outcome may be, the procedure’s outcome is correct because the procedure was strictly adhered to. He admits though that if it were between proceduralism and correctness theory, the latter would be preferable and more plausible. It is here that he transitions into discussing correctness theory.
This theory pertain to the idea of majority rule. Under majority rule, hypothetically if one hundred people were voting on a decision and fifty one voted yes, that decision would come to pass and, by majority rule, it would be essentially correct. As more people are involved in deciding whether or not to pass it, the decision, whether passed or not, would be virtually infallible. In discussing this theory, he addresses the issue it presents namely that it cannot meet the qualified acceptability requirement. This requirement dictates that the enforcement of a decision is only justified if the belief is acceptable to all points of view. For example, if there are fifty one people who vote “for” while the other forty nine vote “against”, can the overall outcome be correct and enforceable if it does not account for the forty nine that were against it? With this failure of correctness theory to meet the requirement, Estlund opens the floor to his theory of epistemic