kaal:claim:3995709-016

Without crowd controls, the reviewer's views and the author's intent are at odds and the reviewer can impose their own logic, forcing the author to rewrite functionally sound code repeatedly, which is highly time consuming and inefficient.

Source quote, verbatim
Because the code reviewer may wish to impose their own logic on the code author, the code author may be required to rewrite code over and over even though the core functionality of the code is sound and dangerous issues were controlled for. This can be highly time consuming and inefficient.
From

Wulf A. Kaal, How DAOs Optimize Open-Source Code Reviews and Create Open-Source Standards (2021), Lack of Crowd Controls, p. 13
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3995709 · source PDF

Cite as

Wulf A. Kaal, How DAOs Optimize Open-Source Code Reviews and Create Open-Source Standards (2021). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3995709

Holds when
Classification

failuresupport: arguedfailure: absence of crowd controls over reviewer preferencefamily: agency-cost-and-managerial-opportunismeconomics

Verify

The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is 6d77dbfb15ee86080bfde0b98089180cabafeb6defdf0f05eaaeb3cb99871e89. Extraction method: pdf-text-layer.
Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/3eb81174ea888888...json
Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3995709-016.md | sha256sum