Hi Frank, thanks for this post. I assume you’ve read Habermas’s concept of “ideal speech,” which offers a kind of theoretical basis to what you’ve described. A dilemma I’ve found in this space is that it may — just may — require “ideal speech” to create “ideal speech.” The Internet’s been around a long time. We’ve had the technology to implement your idea for decades now, on a mass scale, with even deeper analytics to draw out even deeper expertise amongst groups of people. I remember an enterprise software out of Germany, about 10 years ago, that worked very much like what you describe. So why has it taken so long to implement these solutions? I can’t help but think if a good Collective Intelligence system had been in place when the BP oil rig exploded in the Gulf of Mexico, a solution to stopping the leak would have come more quickly, saving so much environmental damage. Why do we continually put popularity (“likes,” “followers,” populism) above the well-managed, collective expressions of expertise? Perhaps we’ve been slow to realise that unlike real world meetings, online engagement offers a way to trade and valuate expertise fairly, in real time, without social bias. I think we’ll get there eventually; just a shame we‘ve had to endure so many poorly designed social networking systems (talking to you, Zuck) to learn the lessons.