# Crowd wisdom

`kaal:entity:crowd-wisdom`

**Status.** derived

This node is assembled mechanically from the 5 claims that carry the concept tag `crowd-wisdom`. It is a roster of what the corpus says under this term. It is **not** an adjudicated definition: no single statement here has been ruled canonical, and no first-appearance call has been made. Read the claims and judge for yourself.

## Every claim under this term

5 claims across 3 works, 2024 to 2024.

**2024**

- [4685567-004](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/4685567-004) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Because Impact 1.0 entrusted individual donors rather than donor collectives with identifying which problems to solve, individual philanthropists can reshape underfunded causes according to their own ideals without meaningful checks and balances or crowd wisdom.
  > Individual philanthropists can leverage underfunded causes and reshape them according to their ideals without significant checks and balances or crowd wisdom considerations.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Impact Investing Innovation - From Impact 1.0 to 3.0 (2024). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4685567
- [4685567-020](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/4685567-020) [mechanism/argued] -- The two stage vote is the mechanism that produces consensus: a non binding test vote reveals how every donor assesses a project, after which donors can change their minds in the formal vote where their reputation tokens are at stake, and in practice decisions are made with unanimity.
  > Once every donor sees how all other donors assess the given project, they can jointly change their minds during the "formal vote" in which their respective reputation tokens are at stake. Typically, in this form of decentralized governance, all decisions are made with unanimity.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Impact Investing Innovation - From Impact 1.0 to 3.0 (2024). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4685567
- [4685567-028](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/4685567-028) [failure/asserted] *(failure mode)* -- The existing fund allocation model is afflicted by uninformed voters, sockpuppets and other gamesmanship, by voting with nothing at stake, and by voting with other people's money, and the crowd wisdom of WEB3 communities in the impact certificate model upgrades that model.
  > the wisdom of the crowd in the respective WEB3 communities of the impact certificate model upgrades the existing fund allocation model which was afflicted by uninformed voters, sockpuppets, and other gamesmanship, voting with nothing at stake, voting with other people's money.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Impact Investing Innovation - From Impact 1.0 to 3.0 (2024). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4685567
- [4734750-013](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/4734750-013) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- When the first reviewer misses a defect and follow-on reviewers anchor entirely on the first reviewer's concerns, the review carries a higher risk of inaccuracy; crowd wisdom is one way to correct this myopia and single point of failure.
  > If the single author of a code review has missed something and the follow-on reviewer focused entirely on the first reviewer's concerns, the code review has a higher risk of lack of accuracy.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Code Review DAO (2024). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4734750
- [4755632-021](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/4755632-021) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Legacy code review carries a single point of failure risk: if the single author of a review misses something and the follow-on reviewer focuses entirely on the first reviewer's concerns, the review has a higher risk of inaccuracy, and crowd wisdom is the corrective for that myopia.
  > If the single author of a code review has missed something and the follow-on reviewer focused entirely on the first reviewer's concerns, the code review has a higher risk of lack of accuracy. Crowd wisdom is one way to correct possible myopia
  Wulf A. Kaal, AI Learning - Decentralized Governance to Optimize Human Output Datasets for AI Learning (2024). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4755632

## Verify

Every claim above resolves to a record carrying a verbatim source quote, the sha256 of the source PDF, and a preformatted citation. Nothing here asks to be taken on trust.

    curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/entities/crowd-wisdom.md | sha256sum

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of this entity node. Its sha256 is the content hash.