Have the normal, default, decision policy for charters in the process

Yes, this would make the process longer, but make the vast majority of charters shorter. All charters have a 'decision policy' section which (to my eye) has been copy-paste in most charters I see. It seems it makes sense to define that as a baseline, and have charters only call out when they are unusual. Such a section could also define what you're allowed to over-ride.

Here's a copy-paste from a charter. Can anyone tell which one?

This group will seek to make decisions through consensus and due process, per the W3C Process Document (section 3.3). Typically, an editor or other participant makes an initial proposal, which is then refined in discussion with members of the group and other reviewers, and consensus emerges with little formal voting being required.

However, if a decision is necessary for timely progress, but consensus is not achieved after careful consideration of the range of views presented, the Chairs may call for a group vote, and record a decision along with any objections.

To afford asynchronous decisions and organizational deliberation, any resolution (including publication decisions) taken in a face-to-face meeting or teleconference will be considered provisional until 10 working days after the publication of the resolution in draft minutes sent, which will be published within 5 working days of the meeting to the working group's mailing list with a 'call for consensus' in the subject line. If no objections are raised on the mailing list by the end of the response period, the resolution will be considered to have consensus as a resolution of the Working Group.

All decisions made by the group should be considered resolved unless and until new information becomes available, or unless reopened at the discretion of the Chairs or the Director.

This charter is written in accordance with the W3C Process Document (Section 3.4, Votes), and includes no voting procedures beyond what the Process Document requires.