Scalable ways to associate evidence (pro or con) with claims will be more valuable in elevating accuracy than complex voting and reputation systems

Discussions on Less Wrong have delved into complex systems of voting and moderation to improve the quality of discourse in a community. I think creating structures to a discussion beyond threaded comments will be more productive and have a higher ROI. For claims, I care less about comments than about whether someone can provide evidence in support or against it, and evidence can be strong or weak and have it's own evidence-children. Summing up across all of that evidence would be interesting.