Quote: "It's true that only a relatively small number of people provide peer reviews, but that's because peer reviewers come mainly from institutions and systems that provide the financial support that makes MERLOT possible in the first place. In any case, there are now peer reviewers in some fields from non-member institutions. Moreover, anyone can register user comments about any material.

It should also be said that there are no materials at all IN MERLOT - just links to materials found elsewhere. And anyone can enter links to materials. So where is the limitation? The weakness?"

Comment: When it comes to the limited reviewer pool, I imagine the kind of comparison he has in mind is with a system like Kuro5hin or Slashdot where anyone can post and review, but there is a "karma" or peer-rating system that affects your trustworthiness.  In such a system, there is no barrier to entry which, I would suggest, makes participation more likely.  Certainly, I've never really bothered to post comments on Merlot.

With the second item, Stephen is working on a distributed learning content network and that is what is behind his remark.  I'm not sure exactly what it will look like, but the core issue would be that any resource on the network would be "reviewable" by anyone without having to be entered into a system like Merlot first.