Thanks for the kind words.
I’d regard that particular post of more being a high-level review or just “impressions”.
When I think “detailed review” I tend to wind up going down this sort of rabbit hole (another SBAF link, and probably the last).
The former is probably more generally useful as it’s a shorter read and more to the point.
Also, the more concise style doesn’t require so many formatting options, which is possibly a better fit for the Discourse software than would be the case with other forums platforms.
I do like the idea of having some quality-bar, be it community driven (the simplest metric being “Likes” I suppose) or based on leadership/members with higher trust-levels. That sort of post/evaluate/promote model would help keep facts straight at least.
Something else to consider is that detailed impressions or full-on reviews (assuming differentiation there is even desirable), should include a picture of the unit/item in question in context/use. Beyond adding some visual interest, and some context, it helps weed out “impressions” posted by shills that have never actually heard the item in question (a major problem on some sites).
Organizationally, it might be possible to let the actual impression/review posts live in the original “[Item] Official” thread in which they’re posted, and maintain a couple of index threads that link to them to catalog the reviews. Alternatively a dedicated category for review, with subcategories by item type (Headphone, IEM, DAC, amp etc.) might be cleaner. I don’t have a firm opinion there, however.
Hope that helps!