You certainly touch a weak spot there, but i guess if structured right the approval system works fine. First of all there will be no AI operating, to my knowledge it's the founder and a few others, who do the releases. This is said to be opened to token holders at a certain stage. In the end they try to be a quality platform, so they need to prevent sh**tposts and group circle voting. If article guidelines are clear and transparent I don't see that big of an issue, everipedia will also work with user voting etc...
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
It could work, It could do great... but i just dont see it as a direct competitor, I guess my point was not too clear, my bad...
I did not know that about everipedia, but it does make a lot more sense for that project tho.