Knowledge
Why do company wikis always die?
Company wikis fail because they become outdated and untrusted. Information in a wiki requires constant updating, which demands time and resources that teams rarely allocate — because maintenance is nobody's job.
Company wikis typically depend on user-generated content that isn't regularly verified. This leads to outdated or incorrect information, breeding mistrust among employees. Without a structured system for verifying content, employees have no assurance of the reliability of the information they find — so they revert to what always worked: asking a colleague.
The decay is also fueled by the natural evolution of a business. As processes and priorities shift, information becomes obsolete. If there isn't a clear process for updating it, inaccuracies accumulate. Busy employees deprioritize updates in favor of immediate work. And once a resource is perceived as unreliable, its utility declines — a vicious circle where fewer people contribute and curate, furthering its descent into irrelevance.
Notice that none of this is a technology problem. Wikis die for a structural reason: keeping knowledge current is a separate project that competes with everyone's actual job — and separate projects lose that competition every week.
That structural flaw is what Duna is designed around. Employees ask questions in chat, and answers come exclusively from Q&A pairs verified by the company's own experts, each with a visible confidence level. When no reliable answer exists, the question is routed to the right expert — whose single reply becomes a verified answer for everyone after. Verification has an expiry date, so aging answers are visibly marked as indicative rather than silently wrong. Curation stops being a separate project; it happens inside the act of answering.