I’ve definitely encountered such cases myself (when actual cited paper didn’t support author’s claims). Nothing prevents the site introducing more direct peer

I’ve definitely encountered such cases myself (when actual cited paper didn’t support author’s claims). Nothing prevents the site introducing more direct peer review (published X papers on a topic -> review a paper). Though If we compare two cases: reading a paper to leave an anonymous review vs reading a paper to cite it. The latter seems like more authentic and useful (less perversed incentives).