Thanks for such an involved response, let me try to respond to what I can...

No, absolutely not. You may think this is a good idea but I can guarantee you, if you work in a translation group you will quickly realize that it's a terrible idea.

I'm actually an active QCer for a group right now, so I don't necessarily see the problem with it, even though it directly impacts what I would be doing.

It's not the lack of people willing to do those parts. It's the lack of GOOD editors/tlc/QC that can also work well with the group and willing to put in the time to finish their part in a timely fashion. If you ask any translation group how many people apply to those groups vs who actually qualify, they can validate that for you.

I'm aware that it's a lack of skilled people, but it's a comparison between one extremely skilled person, or ten moderately skilled people. The one extremely skilled person will most definitely have gaps somewhere in their skillset, and there's nothing to offset that gap. The ten moderately skilled people are all individually worse than the single skilled person, but their gaps can be filled by the other members in the group. Possibly, at least.

Which is mostly on the OELVN side and I probably don't even have to mention their quality compared to the professional Japanese ones.

There are examples of this, yeah, but Sekai's pretty big on using Kickstarter and they're pretty high quality.

Try thinking of it this way, if no one has crowdsourced it, isn't it also possible that it just doesn't work? Fan translations are using their own free time on their projects. If it made their life easier and it met their standards it would have been adopted a long time ago.

You have an entirely valid point in that maybe it isn't done simply because it doesn't work. I accept that that could be the case, but at the same time, maybe it hasn't been adopted because there's no good venue for it to go through. Crowdfunding attempts before platforms such as Kickstarter and Indiegogo were around weren't nearly as successful or as widely-accessed or publicized. I'm sure that there are people who still say crowdfunding is a terrible idea, even throughout however many successful campaigns there have been.

Except peer-review only works when you have experts looking over it. It's true in science and it's also true in here. Why would groups collaborate to peer-review others when majority of groups never finish their project? Not to mention it takes away time from their own projects.

I don't necessarily think you need experts to look over it. The people who know how a VN should read are the people who read it. That's what makes them fit my very loose definition of "peers".

For the rest of your comments, I didn't answer things that sorta/loosely agreed with what I posted, and if there's something I missed out on, please feel free to let me know.