I've always wanted to see the ability to tag a response (or the article itself) with its rhetorical type and fallacies in particular. Maybe add some extra categories for "citation needed", "supporting evidence", "contrary evidence" that I don't think would exist in a traditional rhetorical set (could be wrong there). Let moderators (probably users) do more than just say "this post sucks". Let them list WHY it sucks. The moderation could be more concretely proven as accurate or inaccurate, and even better, it might train the readers to spot the nonsense not only in responses but elsewhere as well. Of course, that could be bad for newspapers and terrible for advertisers.