> It is very easy to solve disinformation - have a good editor who notes the quality of the evidence clearly. - how do you identify candidates? - how do you

> It is very easy to solve disinformation - have a good editor who notes the quality of the evidence clearly. - how do you identify candidates? - how do you know that the candidate that is selected is actually what the judges think they are? - how do you know that the candidate is not at least partially compromised, on an ongoing basis? - for any given editorial issue, how do you know that the candidate is performing perfectly (or, when you said "solve", were you perhaps joking)? - is that air you're breathing right now?