Peer reviews should be done in public and considered an ongoing process rather than a one-time thing. If an expert thinks some questions are worth asking, then the resulting discussion should be available for younger generations to learn from it as well. I think the open source ecosystem has shown the effectiveness of such a system. As more data is made public it becomes easier and more effective to sniff out bad actors as well.

We could also take steps towards helping establish high reputation for certain papers by introducing a mechanism other than citation count. Maybe some kind of stamp of approval.