[googlemike]

Threads like this made me with HN had a 'verification' system for certain (opt in by poster) posts a la /r/AskHistorians/. If you are not familiar, therein any comment not made by a verified user or not following extremely strict citation guidelines gets deleted.

[lm28469]

As long as everyone keep it civilised and learn from each-other I don't really see the point.

When someone posts obvious misinformation he's downvoted to oblivion fairly quickly, and when someone makes an honest mistake he's corrected by people who know better and hopefully update his views adequately.

[ajna91]

What if somebody honestly posts compelling, non-obvious misinformation? How confident are you that would be corrected?

[rsync]

"What if somebody honestly posts compelling, non-obvious misinformation? How confident are you that would be corrected?"

My hopeful attitude is that none of us are so fragile and gratuitously impressionable that this would be dangerous.

My further hope is that anyone that might be so impacted would incorporate the digestion and (eventual) repudiation of this information as part of their intellectual maturation process.

My final hope is that we all learn how dangerous and stifling it is to hand over defining and legitemising "truth" to others. You need to learn and grow as an intellectual being and that doesn't come in a hothouse protected from all perturbations.

[notriddle]

None at all.

[ChuckMcM]

On this site? Pretty confident.

[quickthrower2]

Depends on the topic. The volume of comments on 737 Max threads makes me wonder if the community moderation can keep up

[SketchySeaBeast]

Are you sure you're not thinking of /r/GateKeeping?

[SubiculumCode]

The best hn stories are interesting and have experts commenting. The worst may be when interesting but no experts are commenting