In this first post, I intentionally didn't say a lot about how rating software could help our current methods of rating information or how it would work, because I had a lot to say about how we rate information now, and I hoped to keep the focus on that (and separate the discussion from talks on a rating system itself, since it's likely more controversial and logically distinct).

I probably should have been clearer on this point in my closing section, because most of the post comments are still based on expectations of how a rating system might work and a discussion of it's potential/perceived flaws.

Maybe I can take that to mean that there's relatively little disagreement in my interpretation of how we rate information today, which I suppose is a good thing, if it means we have some consensus agreement on much of the information shared so far.

Anyways, my next post will explore some of the concerns you've raised about potential implementations of a rating system.