> I don't see how that's different from peer review
A lot of people think they're subject-matter experts and may comment on your article, but may be mistaken.
In all the peer review processes I've been involved in reviewers review each others reviews before they go out. Other reviewers will challenge a bad or misleading review. If there aren't people who know enough about the subject they'll go out and find someone who is.
You could literally do this process in a web interface that looked like Hacker News, but they already pretty much do.
I think if you built your dream review system... I think you may find it looks pretty much like what we have already.
A lot of people think they're subject-matter experts and may comment on your article, but may be mistaken.
In all the peer review processes I've been involved in reviewers review each others reviews before they go out. Other reviewers will challenge a bad or misleading review. If there aren't people who know enough about the subject they'll go out and find someone who is.
You could literally do this process in a web interface that looked like Hacker News, but they already pretty much do.
I think if you built your dream review system... I think you may find it looks pretty much like what we have already.
> callouts on Twitter and Hacker News
Sounds like a popularity contest.