user3407: I'm wondering if the following scenario has ever been played out:

Once side of a chess game is played by multiple humans at once,
  collaboratively determining what the next move will be.  This could,
  perhaps, be enforced by some sort of game logic where the move with
  the highest percentage is the chosen-move.  Let's pretend that there
  could be as many as 1000 humans contributing to the decision making. 
  The other side is played by a single chess computer, and a
  reasonably-good one at that.

Has anyone ever attempted something like this?  If so, what was the outcome?  Does adding more human players to make decisions for one side of the game increase the likelihood of that side defeating a computer opponent?  

user15223: Here's a source about how GM David Howell and three others took on AlphaZero in a game. They played two games, both drawn.
Caveat: AlphaZero isn't like conventional engines. Conventional engines have a "contempt" score that tweaks how it plays against weaker opposition. With a high contempt score, conventional engines are very likely to have beaten GM David Howell and his three teammates. 

user3237: Six months ago a match was held on ICC: Komodo, one of the strongest engine, faced hundreds of people combined. Komodo won.
http://www.chessclub.com/article/icc-vs.-komodo-online-voting-match

3407: <p>I'm wondering if the following scenario has ever been played out:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Once side of a chess game is played by multiple humans at once,
  collaboratively determining what the next move will be.  This could,
  perhaps, be enforced by some sort of game logic where the move with
  the highest percentage is the chosen-move.  Let's pretend that there
  could be as many as 1000 humans contributing to the decision making. 
  The other side is played by a single chess computer, and a
  reasonably-good one at that.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Has anyone ever attempted something like this?  If so, what was the outcome?  Does adding more human players to make decisions for one side of the game increase the likelihood of that side defeating a computer opponent?  </p>
 15223: <p>Here's a source about how <a href="https://www.chessable.com/blog/2018/12/10/alphazero-google-david-howell-draw/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">GM David Howell and three others took on AlphaZero in a game</a>. They played two games, both drawn.</p>

<p>Caveat: AlphaZero isn't like conventional engines. Conventional engines have a "contempt" score that tweaks how it plays against weaker opposition. With a high contempt score, conventional engines are very likely to have beaten GM David Howell and his three teammates. </p>
 3237: <p>Six months ago a match was held on ICC: Komodo, one of the strongest engine, faced hundreds of people combined. Komodo won.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.chessclub.com/article/icc-vs.-komodo-online-voting-match" rel="nofollow">http://www.chessclub.com/article/icc-vs.-komodo-online-voting-match</a></p>
