What is an "expert" parent?

I would expect the real experts to be able to back up their answers even better than non-experts. After all, if they are indeed an expert or a professional, they ought to be familiar with sources or references that support their knowledge or opinions.

You should promote your back-it-up principle to all users, expert or not. It makes sense. Even for experts.

I second Chris' suggestion that everyone should provide supporting evidence for their assertions, expert or not. That little number next to one's user name can be a general indication of one's prior helpfulness, but it doesn't mean they're the world's foremost expert in the topic of the day. I would also suggest that there is some responsibility on the part of the reader to evaluate the assertions of others with an open mind, clear heart, and the goal of finding the best meaning in the other person's post. We can get caught up in our emotional responses to people who we disagree with, and it can lower the level of the discussion if the emotional response takes over. We get less out, and we contribute less back.

A quote from Buddha seems germane to this topic (no, I'm not a Buddhist, just a fan of this and many other of his quotes):

"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it."

Reputation on M4M reflects mostly the activity on the site, secondly the experience - without havoing experienced a similar situation, I don't think you can come up with a good answer.

In my opinion, a good answer first provides anecdotal evidence ("see, you're not alone with that. I experienced that too") and then backs it up with proper scientific background.

If you look at the answers of most of the high-reps, that is what they do. (Although some, me included, still need more consistency in backing-it-up *ahem*)

So, in short, I think it is a measure for expert parents, i.e. someone with experience in that field.

I think the term "expert parent" is a rather redundant one. Chris W Rea s answer is spot on. Professionals are people who are qualified to do a certain job, and if they are good at it they are then known or referred to as experts in that field, but I don't see that the same cannot be said for parenting, when there many "right" ways of doing the same thing, and so many varying but valid opinions.

So my replies would be;

"Does this do a good job of making sure that the reputation goes to the "expert parent" Yes (but I think it would be much better to drop the word expert). I think it works well in that the rep points are distributed amongst those who are sharing their knowledge as a parent, and backing it up with truthful experience, and this is probably more helpful than if you are merely sharing knowledge that you have researched and found agreeable or justifiable with your own practices and experiences.

I am not too sure Joel's thinking regarding Q&A communities is applicable to parenting, and think that it could actually alter how the site is perceived.

Taking a different direction? I think part of the sites success is the variety of responses and the instant/constant exposure to opinions of other parents, regardless of background, gender, culture and so fourth, and this could help in find the right direction.

You're only an "expert parent" in so much as it overlaps with any other field you have some experience in.

For example, I'm not even a dad (yet) but I've answered a few sciencey questions on moms4mom because I have a background in engineering and feel somewhat qualified to do so. I always strive to find a suitable reference to back up any position or claim as I don't expect anyone to take any answer on face value.

It seems to me that self-proclaimed "parenting experts" generally seem to be promoters of fads and cargo-cult practices that don't bear the test of time or scientific study. The reason I like moms4mom (apart from my general obsession with answering questions) is that the extreme elements aren't able to take over. Having to justify a stance definitely moderates contributor's attitudes and avoids the flame wars that emotive topics often engender.

I don't think very many sites/topics are going to be big "winners" the way StackOverflow is.

Stackoverflow works very well because although it covers a very wide subject area, there are lots and lots of experts available to ask and answer questions. Also, the subject matter is mostly objective - if you write a certain bit of code, (mostly) predictable things will happen when it runs. Joel and Jeff's insistence on strict Q&A works well for coding questions. Another factor that comes to mind is that most questions are not localized: algorithms work the same no matter where you are.

By comparison, ServerFault isn't quite as clear a winner. It's also a broad subject area, but there are fewer true experts available - managing a 100-node network or 500 or 1000 or more is very different than just managing your home systems. There are more discussion-type questions than for SO, so the format isn't as good a fit.

Now look at parenting. Also a broad subject. Tons of people with experience, both professional and amateur. But not very many clear-cut, objective, one size fits all answers. It seems to me that if there's an allowance for more discussion in the answers (and there seems to be), then there should be no problem with M4M surviving.

Law? I'd say it's too localized, not enough experts, and expertise really matters. Unlike SO, a law Q&A site seems to me to be intrinsically USA-only.