I agree with the edit. A good system should be working smarter and more pointedly. If you are already implementing a system that is smart enough to detect if vo

I agree with the edit. A good system should be working smarter and more pointedly. If you are already implementing a system that is smart enough to detect if votes agree with a editors system, wouldn't it be better to just detect if everyone else's votes agree with your own personal ones and then show such things? The whole notion of having an ivory tower that tries to shut itself off from other people because they degrade conversation is like security through obscurity. What this and reddit needs are a proper recommendation system, which could be based on tagging. Reddit says they are going to do this, but even then I don't imagine it will be an overly complicated tagging regime (even though they are taking long enough to roll it out). Once you get into basic tagging (eg just a number of strings) you really have a subset of an ontology, so the next logical step is to build it into a big proper one like freebase is doing, which has proper datatypes for each tag value, which can then be other objects in a database. In this way articles can have a set of tags, like a category, a rating of intellectualness, etc. These tags should be modifiable and addable. People should be able to have different values that reflect what they think of them. The tags that are most relevant should be displayed. An article could have a quality value that some could rate highly, and some poorly. Then the system, based on your own past tagging, can predict what default value yours should have. It's much like the netflix challenge (which is 80% solved), only its not just for one value of one tag, and the values are more complicated. Anyway, I've thought this through too much because I am half way to solving it myself (hopefully!). We'll see if it works when I start pulling people away from here :p