As they describe, reviewers serve an invaluable function. Unless a system of review, to sort the wheat from chaff, were developed (and, it appears that this has been given the least thought), the system would just be overrun with wannabes. \n\nEvery competent researcher recognizes the observation that it takes ten to one hundred times as much effort to generate quality as to generate trash and without constraint, competent research would be flushed away in such a river just as many thoughtful comments on some blogs are today.\n\nSelf-anointed reviewers, or those selected by mere numbers of contributions, would likely degenerate to a level seen on Wikipedia, so that's out. \n\nThat one can imagine and construct a web site to allow posting, retrieving, commenting on, or moving articles and data with membership, ratings, profiles etc is trivial. The hard problem to be solved is the same as it is in peer-reviewed journals - establishment of standards, enforcement of those standards, and review of content for all the issues mentioned by others here. While high standards and hierarchical control are hard to swallow by the more ambitious, without solving that problem, the rest is worthless.\n\nHopefully, many will try their hand at various on-line research publishing sites (I do like the idea) and, if they do, they likely will, as with various publishing societies today, come to be recognized as having high, medium and no standards and treated accordingly.