I’ve worked in some pretty massive companies, as well as tiny ones and all in between.

They don’t need the “distributed” part at all because you don’t want every ignorant Jane and Joe working on it, you want just people who actually know about that domain and who have been selected exactly for that knowledge and responsabilities, which is a small group that can organise themselves, the “independent” part is done by those that make the things not being the same people as those who check the things (and companies that don’t segregate creation from validation don’t have the will for true “independent” review, hence won’t care about that feature) and the unfalsifiable thing can be handled much more easilly by cryptographic hashes with timestamps or, way more common, simply automatic backups of documents whenever they’re changed or people pulling out docs from old e-mails and pointing out the part that was different in the old one.

To make Standards participants have to be chosen, because if any rando gets to participate in it the whole thing will be WAY more noise than genuine quality content, and with that comes organisation and all sorts of mechanisms in which the actual contents are validated (not the “who did it and when” which blockchain provides - because it’s a select group and that’s easy to find out - but actually “is it any good” and “does it make sense”, which blockchain does NOT provide or help with at all).

I’ve worked in Tech for 2 decades an what you wrote reeks of “solution looking for a problem” since it doesn’t solve the genuine bottlenecks in that process, it just covers minor or irrelevant features that might or not be used in it.

Also I got the impression you have no idea how people actually work at creating standards in large enough companies that the number of people involved is more than just 1 or 2.