Legitimation by paralogy

I'm attempting to make sense of Lyotard's final chapter on legitimation by paralogy. Paralogy, as I understand it, captures the search for new meaning in old language games. I am unsure how paralogy is the "treatment to the problem of legitimation" (65), and also why Lyotard does not believe the "the goal of dialogue is consensus" (65). As a pluralist, I understand Lyotard's aversion to consensus, however, his personal feelings against it does not make it untrue. Also, what are the diameters of consensus? A community, a country, a continent? And now, with the spread of the internet, would consensus have to include every online user?Finally, I am also unclear on how paralogy works with performative language games or if it does at all. Is paralogy the only alternative to consensus and what does consensus, especially on the internet, mean? Basically I'm just very confused...