Future Moderation Schemes? (Score 1)

What the media got wrong IMHO about the "Wikipedia is flawed!" stories of late is that they didn't assess the moderation scheme of wikipedia (open and everchanging, free-for-all) with that of "professional" publishing (paid editors, publish once, fully controlled), which is the interesting story.

Do you think it's possible for more complex moderation schemes for Wikipedia, or is full openness the only nature of the beast?

For example, it would be simple to set up a peer review process (peer reviewers simply assess an entry and post their credentials), but this falls apart as soon as the post they peer reviewed gets changed at all.

Related: most of the so-called "Web 2.0" sites & gizmos seem to do 1 thing well and work on a simple interface and network model (Flickr, Wikipedia, Blogger, etc.) Do you think we'll see a blending of these things into more complex systems, or do they only work if they are kept simple?