Soft peer review?

Somehow, one link led to another, and I found myself on this site: Soft peer review? “Traditional peer review has been criticised on various grounds but possibly the major limitation it currently faces is scalability, i.e. the ability to cope with an increasingly large number of submissions, which—given the limited number of available reviewers and time constraints on the publication cycle—results in a relative small acceptance rate for high quality journals. Although I don’t think social software will ever replace hard evaluation processes such as traditional peer review, I suspect that soft evaluation systems(as those made possible by social software) will soon take over in terms of efficiency and scalability.”
Immediacy is one of the greatest factors of soft peer review. Traditional journals assume that an article is complete when it’s published. Posting an article online with options for feedback and interaction, assumes that an article is the starting point for additional development. I find this immediate idea dissemination process valuable - one blogger posts an idea/article and the concept is quickly distributed/disseminated/extended through various forums (blogs, twitter, added to a wiki, etc.).