If we add just one more piece, we get a powerful sociocratic system that will manage itself. Essentially, we're going to encourage posters to use their real names. Everybody likes using screen names on the Internet, for the anonymity. But we are not looking for material generated by people who don't want anyone to know who wrote it. Rather, we want exactly the opposite — we want material that enhances the personal and/or professional reputations of the posters. In other words, we're looking for professional quality material. It doesn't have to agree with the consensus, and the point of view doesn't have to be neutral. It can be original research. But it can't be anonymous — it has to be owned by an individual or a team, and the responsible parties have to be identified. Then, true experts will step up and start posting high quality material so that they can get the name recognition. Experts who want to position themselves further up the hierarchy, for even more name recognition, will expend more effort to develop representations of more general issues.
For example, an undergraduate might have recently done an excellent term paper on the mating habits of Peruvian fruit flies, and posted it into the "flies" category. This category might be owned by a postgraduate doing original research on flies, and is familiar with most of the existing papers on the topic. So she has created a page that lists the relevant resources, and when the undergraduate posted a new paper, she reviewed it. If it was garbage she would have removed it, but if it's OK, she leaves it, perhaps contacting the poster with suggestions on how it can be improved. Why does she do this? Because she is building a name for herself as an expert on flies, and it's a credit to her that her page lists all of the resources. In other words, she wants for there to be no more complete and well-organized page than hers.
Similarly, her high-quality "flies" page might be listed in the next category up, which might be entomology, and which might be maintained by a professor. Only if she continues to keep her "flies" page up-to-date and well-written will the professor continue to list her work, because the professor has her own professional reputation to maintain. And likewise, entomology is a sub-set of biology, which is a sub-set of the physical sciences. At each level in this hierarchy, people will strive to do high-quality work so that it won't get replaced.
To make this work, the site administrators need only select the best-written, most comprehensive reviews of the various disciplines for inclusion at the top level, and the competitive pressure will propagate throughout the rest of the hierarchy. If everybody from the top down removes garbage posts and strives to integrate legitimate suggestions into their works, the whole thing will stay clean. In others words, the CEO of a large corporation doesn't have to manage every employee. She only has to manage the junior executives striving to keep their departments in line. They'll do a pretty good job of managing themselves if they're working online, and they know that they can be replaced in just a couple of mouse clicks. :) So the site administrators just have to create the right categories to include the full scope of articles, and they have to censor nothing except stuff that just doesn't belong at or near the top level, because it was poorly done, or too narrow in focus.
For example, we might not believe that UFOs exist, but we refuse to censor posts on the topic, because we have no intention of censoring any topic. So UFO posts go in the UFO folder, not in the trash-can. Within the UFO community, there are people who are universally recognized as overall experts, and others who are just experts in certain topics (e.g., crop circles, or abductions that resulted in alien pregnancies). The universal experts, who got that way by their thorough understanding of the subject and their superior communicative skills, will undoubtedly produce the best introductory page to the study of UFOs, and they'll make sure to include all of the high quality literature on individual topics (such as crop circles, or little green babies) done by others, since they want to present the topic in the best possible light. Hence the site administrators do not have to judge whether the study of UFOs is good science, or figure out who's who in a discipline about which they know nothing. They just have to know polished work when they see it, and to sort it all out based on topic. It's all good, but there is definitely a time and a place for everything, and if we can get things into their proper places, people interested in such things can find what they want, all in one place.
Encourage people to use their real names.