As I understand it, the Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS) is the backbone of Genealogy today, and yet it has not been mentioned in a question asked here for over three years, and only in 20 questions and answers total.
At the same time the number of questions per day asked here continues to usually be around or slightly more than 1 per day, and rarely has it touched 2 per day, so I think we need some new ideas for how to increase that.
For a long time I have been wanting to become better at routinely applying the GPS to my own amateur research, and have been wondering how I can use the time I spend here to do that.
Although I will talk about the GPS, @ColeValleyGirl has pointed out that the GPS is not the only way to perform rigorous genealogical research so anything I say about the GPS can be read as applying equally to UK Society of Genealogists' formulation of Standards and Good Practice.
I think a lot of our users start researching their family history by wondering who their ancestors are, then start to quickly flesh out a family tree using hints from Ancestry.com etc, and come up with some elaborate and romantic hypotheses for where they came from. The one thing that is usually lacking in these trees, and lacking in a big way, is evidence to support the many hypotheses that each tree depends on if it is to be considered more than a shadow of reality.
It is here that I think we can help those users and ourselves to become more rigorous in our genealogical approach by endorsing the asking of a new "style" of question.
This new "style" is in no way intended to become the norm for questions here - because that would certainly alienate many of our potential users - it is intended as just another style of question and might offer a path to a form of Peer Review.
As an example of the Q&A style that I am thinking could lead to conclusions that might meet the Genealogical Proof Standard, or at least to the level of something that might be considered an early/advanced draft of something that could, I have now posted this self-answered question, and invite other answers to it:
Does this idea have any merit? Would asking some questions in this way help/hinder our efforts to build a site with more and better Q&As to attract the best genealogists and family historians that we can to our site?
Having recently viewed (at @JanMurphy's suggestion) a webinar by Warren Bittner called "Proof Arguments - How to write them and why they matter", I am thinking that a question could perhaps be structured along the lines of:
This is my proof argument tying Thomas Morgan to his birth family written "Bittner-style", have I made my case sufficiently?
<insert proof argument here>
with "Yes" being indicated by votes on the question and/or answers to that effect, with other answers being "No, because ..."