I wonder if a code review contract could be baked into the protocol for protocol changes. For example, with every halving, a doubling of reviews by previous committers is required. Eventually it results in it being near impossible to make changes to the software and the network ossifies as the bulk of committers die off.

I guess that would add a perverse incentive to frantically get new people to contribute just for the sake of keeping open the possibility of contributions. So nevermind.

There is nothing sacred about code review but I guess it's what we've got.