How it works
You decide what becomes the next version. Automated review assists; you are the authority.
PROPOSED ──► UNDER REVIEW ──► APPROVED ──► COMMITTED
│
└──► REJECTED
what you see: the diff, by claim the previous version
automated findings the contributor and their sources
other reviews confidence and conflictsAutomated review is advisory
Duplicates, contradictions (same topic and subject, similar claim, different statement), missing sources, low confidence, removals of reviewed claims, and claim changes with no new source.
Approvals are counted
The policy says how many. A contributor cannot approve their own proposal. A reject closes it.
Landing stamps you
Every claim the proposal changed records you as a reviewer. Readers see “reviewed by oncology-review.eth”.
Sign it
knowledge review <n> --approve --sign signs the verdict with the key that owns your ENS name; land verifies the signer against the name’s owner on chain and shows “verified” instead of “claimed”. Namespaces can require it (--signed-approvals true).
Nothing is lost
A rejected proposal keeps its branch. A landed one can be reverted with a new version; history is never rewritten.
- 01
See what is waiting
Open proposals with their findings.knowledge proposals --as oncology-review.eth - 02
Read the proposal
The diff by claim, the findings, other reviews.knowledge review 1 --as oncology-review.eth - 03
Decide
Approve, reject, or comment. When approvals reach the policy threshold the proposal is APPROVED.knowledge review 1 --approve \ -m "Matches the FDA label; source checked." --as oncology-review.eth knowledge review 2 --reject -m "No sources." --as oncology-review.eth - 04
Land and publish
Landing merges onto main as the next version. As a granted reviewer you can publish it yourself, with your own wallet.knowledge land 1 --as oncology-review.eth # → v42 knowledge push - 05
In the explorer
Every proposal has a page: findings, diff, reviews, and the commit it landed as. /k/cancer-research.eth/reviews