Regarding Crowdleaks, I think this idea is flawed from the start.
One thing Wikileaks does that Crowdleaks cannot is assess the value or credibility of submissions. This sounds like the sort of thing that will be filled with "leaks" about Viagra, diplomas, "OEM" software, and Nigerian fortunes. Who'd want to host that?
I think the Osiris reputation system solve the issue
The Reputations system and the subsequent generation of multiple points of view of a portal is one of the most innovative aspects of the program. Unlike "traditional" systems where the computational work (calculation of statistics, indexing of content, etc ...) is always made by a central server, Osiris use a distributed approach, where the majority of the works is made by users of a portal, due to this there may be more distinct points of view of a portal, depending on used account.
Each user is free to give reputation (positive or negative) to another user according to its contribution to the portal, based on these reputations, the system processes the pages by removing the contents of users evaluated negatively (such as spammers) and importing the reputations of users considered positively. This allow the creation of a network of assessments that allows management of a portal. Note that each client processes the data independently on its machine in a process that is called stabilization of the portal.