Would you care to link that tenuous red flag to the investigate articles Scopes produces in some fashion?

She now works as an admin for Snopes. Read the entire comment before kneejerk replying champ

So because David Mikkelson either divorced his wife and married his assistant, or divorced his wife and hired his mistress, you worry that he might be corruptible, given the right incentives. OK, although this kinda skates over the fact that their consequent unreliability would be obvious to others and thus reduce the market value of their service.

I'm not clear why you keep mentioning the fact that the other woman was a former porn star/professional escort. Are you trying to argue that sex workers are inherently untrustworthy people or something?

You have it exactly backwards. I've never seen anyone give a good reason why Snopes should be trusted. The Mikkelsons were self-appointed "authorities" from the beginning, with zero actual expertise or credentials in most of the areas they opine upon.

Edit: I should add that I view any organization that feels the need to use "truth", "fact", or similar in its name with an extremely jaundiced eye. It's reminiscent of Pravda and "Honest John's Used Cars". Organizations with actual earned credibility don't use names like that, as a rule.

Their impressive library of detailed articles in where they factually report on myths and conspiracy theories?

Why are you asking such a vague, open-ended question?

"The sky is blue because other stars reflect blue light onto our atmosphere." How would you rate that, given Snopes' scales?

Do you have any specific examples where there was a concise yet opinionated decision on any published articles from Snopes that don't rely on hard evidence for their conclusion?

Now they are into very fuzzy realms where they are going to have to fact check claims that are plausible. That's hard work. You have to actually... uhh... check the actual claims.

Nobody really fact checks anymore because it's damn expensive. Unless someone gives them a budget for real gumshoe work, Snopes will just end up applying a bunch of political bias filters and lazy heuristics. Facebook could get that with deep learning so I'm not sure why they'd be interested.