zlacker

It's the evaluation of the experiment that I am most worried about. How do you evaluate a decrease in people being exposed to diversity of opinion? How do you evaluate how many articles are willfully suppressed but might have been lead to good discussion?

I am afraid that potential benefits of this policy are easier to measure (I.e. less flame wars) and the bad parts are not (less deep and critical discussion), we will lead to the conclusion that it is better to keep such a policy in place without a good sense of what we are losing in the process.