Experiment #3 - Crowdsourcing Faux Shakespeare

I have long been fascinated with the idea of crowdsourcing. See the video below for a brief explanation.


Crowdsourcing is effective partially because when people have diversity of thought, they can look at something with fresh eyes and a different perspective. That's the reason we peer review, that's the reason we have group workshopping in our writing classes, and that's the reason private companies have been able to put people on the moon, fix our toothpaste and stop our orange juice from going brown at less than 1/10th the cost of what it previously would have been (see the X Prize foundation for more on that). 
I tried a couple ways of experimenting with connecting people through an open call previously, first by asking people to add their thoughts to a wiki I set up. I think this failed largely because it was too much work, and wikis are too difficult to edit (especially for one who is unfamiliar with wikis). A few people contributed, but most people weren't sure of what they should contribute or how.
Since that was too much work I asked people to comment on/critique a later soliloquoy of the faux Shakespearian character William the Conqueror. A lot of people read the post, and a few people commented, but they were cut off from participation -- they could only say, "I like this" or "I don't like this."
I'm an entrepreneur, and in my spare time I and some other BYU students have been working on a project called GrassWire, which we hope will help crowdsource journalism, lowering the barriers to entry for would-be journalists yet keeping high quality due to crowdsourced editing/fact checking. Our theory is that if one person takes ownership for and provides the original content for a news article, others will edit and/or fact check as they read, and from their suggestions the original author can improve their article. It takes crowdsourcing to a new level, and basically creates a virtual, mass-oriented workshopping for each article.
So what if we combined the concepts of collaboration/crowdsourcing and social validation and turned them into group creation?
In other words, what if I wrote something for our faux Shakespeare play, and instead of just posting it on the blog I put it in a Google Doc (a format familiar to all), and asked the same social network that got over 100 views to the last soliloquy in 24 hours? I would be able to revert back to originals if I didn't like changes, and the diversity of thinking and creativity would make the sections that may be hard for any individual better; for some it will just click. 
I'll write something, and see how much better everyone working together can make it.
E Pluribus Unum.