Ask HN: What do you think is the soln to the issue of anonymous pseudo-experts?
In platforms like reddit, where there are sub-communities(subreddits) like eli5, askscience, etc--where anyone with half-knowledge can answer a vaguely sciency looking answer or something that resonates with the majority using jargons--how do you bring accountability if no one knows what is true? It is like there is potentially no downsides with such anonymous platforms. My concern mostly is with people who comeback and regurgitate the eli5 version of what they read in reddit about things like human brain and start preaching others what should one do incase of depression and anxiety.
My question is--what do you think is the best solution towards ensuring upvoting of right answers as opposed to majoritarian answers? I find it ironic that you posed this question on a forum with many anonymous pseudo-experts. The solution, in my expert opinion, is to teach people to think critically and use multiple trusted sources to gather information.