I'm with Deck on this. While individual stages were pretty much all messed up at least somewhat, maybe Typing excluded, in fulfilling the concept effectively, the real issue is that the combination of mess-ups. This is only avoided if clear framework is provided in concept assessment. And it wasn't.
With broad concepts such as "momentum" or "risk," the direction, or at least a narrow range of directions, has to be discussed and reached through consensus in the concept assessment. When that isn't achieved, the entire CAP process from there on out can founder. This is not the first time this has happened, but it certainly is the clearest example of it. Reachzero showed well how to take a multi-definitional concept and deal with it step by step. Deck to a lesser degree, since bad typing is not nearly as vague as "risk" or "momentum," had similar leadership in the assessment stage. Even though I disagreed with the direction the community reached consensus toward, it still worked, and I was confident it still would result in a successful CAP, if not the one I thought it would be.
Consensus, even if it's a 55-45 consensus, is better than the road we traveled with Aurumoth... Which would be best described as, "Hey we have a 45/35/20 (or something) split on ideas. No one has a clear majority, so let's just throw them all in and everyone can be happy and surely it will work!"