The key issue as i see it is that the IGKT can position itself as an easy to find/search one-stop-shop for knot testers, knot test reports and peer review of those reports.
As it currently stands, where exactly does a would-be knot tester post results and seek peer review? For the IGKT’s part, it is an incoherent mess. It is not easy to search for, and find knot test report in one coherent place.
The default site to publish appears to be the ITRS Link: http://itrsonline.org/
But peer review/discussion doesn’t occur at the ITRS site.
Also, there appears to be a single-minded and nauseating default mind-set that MBS yield is THE defining factor for determining knot performance. That is, the default mind-set is ‘Knot A’ versus ‘Knot B’ in a pull-it-till-it-breaks contest - with the winner of the contest being declared ‘superior’.
There are many people undertaking knot testing around the world…and where exactly do they go to publish their reports and to seek peer review of their reports? As stated, the ITRS is one place but, you dont receive advice and/or peer review feedback.
The IGKT has an opportunity to position itself as the world clearing house for all knot testers and test reports.
Its a case of… “If you build it, they will come”.
So, because there is essentially no where to go at the present moment, knot testers continue to act in isolation and publish their findings as they see fit - right or ludicrously wrong - with no mechanism for any critical peer review. And so misinformation and sometimes disinformation continues to propagate.
As it currently stands, few see the IGKT as being a credible place to publish knot test reports and to seek expert peer review. For example, Richard Delaney, Grant Prattley, Tom Evans, etc, are semi-professional knot testers who continue to test and publish their results. These are the type of individuals whom the IGKT could have as a target market.
Over time, you begin to gain momentum and you reach a critical mass of knot testers. Word-of-mouth helps too.
I see this as such a critically important matter that it warrants creation of its own separate topic category. It should be easy for people around the world to search for and find knot test reports. The idea is that you make it EASY to find, dont bury it in-between or underneath something. Make it stand out like the proverbial!
I might also add that when members of the IGKT provide critical feedback, it should be done in a respectful manner - using science as voice. If we berate or scold the author of the test report - they will likely feel vilified and not return in the future. So we need to be careful to be constructive and not destructive in our criticisms of their reports.
The IGKT has a real opportunity to make a difference…I truly hope that the decision makers share this vision 
PS I was thinking about Elon Musk and SpaceX and how they are changing the default mindset of access to space. The default mindset has been to build a rocket, use it once and then throw it away. Its like building a Boeing 747 jet, fly it once from point A to point B and then throw it away. Elon Musk now has his ‘block 5’ Falcon 9 rocket which can be re-used 10 times with just inspections and maybe up to 100 times with some refurbishment. This is changing the paradigm - and shaking up the entire space industry (for the better). Elon is making a real difference…he has a vision and the will-power to see it through. It will revolutionize access to space and make human kind as a multi-planet species.
Obviously the IGKT is not Elon Musk, nor is it SpaceX. But, the IGKT is in a position to make a real difference!
