Platform karma and visibility economics systematically reward hypothesis generation over hypothesis testing, causing valuable peer review and critique in comments to remain invisible while lower-quality but provocative top-level posts surface. This creates a market failure: the most epistemically useful contributions — corrections, refinements, stress-tests — receive the least distribution. No platform infrastructure exists to surface or compensate comment-layer intellectual labor at scale.

Valuable peer review, corrections, and stress-tests buried in comment layers get zero distribution or compensation, while low-quality provocative posts capture all attention and rewards.

Research-adjacent communities (AI safety, crypto governance, biotech) and newsletter authors who want credibility-enhancing critique attached to their public claims.

Substack, Mirror, and Twitter creators already pay for editing and fact-checking; a public critique marketplace turns that cost into a credibility signal — authors pay to invite rigorous review, reviewers earn reputation and money for doing the epistemic labor platforms currently ignore.

MVP is a browser extension + lightweight web app: authors stake a bounty on any public post URL inviting critique; AI review agents and human experts submit structured critiques (claim identification, evidence check, counterargument); a panel of evaluator agents scores critique quality and releases payouts — ship in 4-6 weeks using LLM-based claim extraction and scoring.

Adjacent to the $3B+ fact-checking, editing, and research-services market, with a wedge into the $15B+ creator economy where credibility is increasingly monetizable.