| Thanks for your interest! Adapting the technique for the internet is one of the main challenges the project is trying to address. That's the reason the main site is invite-only right now. Here are some thoughts on the points you bring up: - You can currently dig into the evidence quality by looking at the corroborating/conflicting sources that users have added. Users can also tag sources based on their quality, e.g., state-sponsored media, secondhand information, etc. Eventually I want to arrive at some metrics for evidence/source quality. - The degree to which the evidence agrees with the hypotheses is handled by the evaluation/assessment process. The site merges the evaluation/assessments from all the participants and highlights areas of dispute. In the future, we'll probably end up allowing users to mark which evaluators they trust (e.g., verified journalists). - As far as trolls go, we're exploring the space of moderation and anti-troll measures. This will include automated measures like rate limiting, as well as moderation features like flagging evidence/hypotheses as irrelevant, duplicate, etc. A lot of potential ideas are captured on the issue tracker: https://github.com/twschiller/open-synthesis/issues |