Would you elaborate on why you think comments on papers might be dangerous? For me it seems like the most natural step forward, given where we are today.<p>As I see it, it would solve many issues. Ideally, we would move away from a publication-count metric, and more onto a reputation-based metric. It would lower the bar for participation in scientific discussion, make reproducibility more important, and generally be a healthy thing for science as a whole, I think. But I want to hear opposing viewpoints!