[RickS]

>To game this, you would have to create tons of accounts upvoting bad arguments, downvoting good ones, and overloading the links to biased secondary sources. But the arguments would still be there.

This doesn't seem like much of a hurdle. It basically describes what happens on reddit, with varying degrees of success. I know of no large social site that's solved this problem.

[mistermann]

I'd think the suggestion would be that each story would get one article. Reddit is a disorganized mish-mash of variations on a story, interfered with by biased moderators, and the "arguments" are rarely anything more than playground trash talk. To my knowledge, no one has made an attempt at making a truly as-objective-as-possible site for current events, I believe the idea has a lot of merit. Of course it wouldn't be perfect, but if it did get traction, I think it would improve things significantly.

I'm curious if anyone (who can see that Reddit is not what's being described) could point out flaws in the idea serious enough that it couldn't (as opposed to wouldn't) work.