I think the success of this format will depend on how conscientiously we interpret what it means to be "civil." If posters decide that civility means only agreement with their point of view, or if they decide to use the review feature as a form of de facto censorship, it will fail. If, on the other hand, we exercise a bit of common courtesy and Christian charity, it could work very well.

So far, I see two personal challenges. One is to temper my naturally snarky sense of humor, and I'm working on that. The other is to come up with a fair standard when I review the messages of others. What is the fine line that separates "good" and "sorta?" If anybody has any insights, I'd appreciate hearing them.