It seems that there might almost be a natural scaling law for multiple sources invoked in a given investigation. With a traditional, established core number of sources, there is more established review of the merits of their reporting. For multiple unestablished or anonymous sources, a certain amount of manpower needed to verify each bias would begin to counter the potential efficiency of crowdsourcing methods. At a certain point, the net gain might cease to scale favourably with numbers, barring emergence of self-organisational practices. How all of this should be taken into consideration when interpreting crowdsourced reports will surely require generations to become known.