[dllthomas]

So I claim an inaccuracy... how do we decide whether I get rewarded? How do we be sure that process isn't abused/gamed/influenced? Why can't we wire that process up to production of news in the first place? The gamification seems redundant.

[curlypaul924]

The gamification is to get more people involved. I can't change the way news is produced, because I don't produce news. But I could make meta-news, which seems to be what riles people up on social media.

I agree that figuring out when to reward users is the hard part. My best solution at the moment is to do something like slashdot/HN/reddit/others with upvotes, moderation, and meta-moderation, but I don't think there is any system completely impervious to manipulation.

[cudgy]

Easy. “We” fact-check the fact-checkers that checked the facts of the fact-checkers who stated the facts that the fact-checker checked.

[curlypaul924]

I think you meant this as a joke, but yes, that's exactly right. It's fact checkers all the way down.