Of course. But as you say it is ‘non-rivalous’
While I have not made up my mind about it as the preferred way of making group decisions it is none-the-less another piece of information relevant to our discussions.
Would I pay to rank it?
No I would not.
I would need to spend my life evaluating all sorts of ideas to know where to rank it.
Even to properly evaluate different group decision-making strategies would take more time and effort than I am willing to give.
I would support a site that drew together all the different ‘group decision-making’ strategies and compared the pros and cons of each and showed how the different strategies when applied by the same group to the same common problem resulted in different decisions and also how the outcome was ‘better’ for one strategy (subject to the definition of ‘better’) and for this to be done across a range of different problems with the same group to show that it was independent of the circumstances. And also do the same with different groups to show the outcome was also independent of the people in any group, and also for different group sizes.
If the data was endorsed by a range of qualified and experienced people, I could read the summary and accept the outcome.
I most certainly would not care one bit about how much money was paid to promote a specific approach.