Yeah, by definition. Someone who has more knowledge in a subject is more reliable than someone who doesn't.
I'm not sure why you want to use layman as a measuring stick.
Not totally but more then other posters on HN that were making claims without research. The NERC report will be totally reliable but that will take 6+ months. And if my conclusions are wrong, they're wrong and I'll update my blog.
> I'm not sure why you want to use layman as a measuring stick.
I made this post as a direct response to previous HN and Reddit posts where the layman were forming conclusions. I did not see a single person quoting or referencing a single standard to back up their claims. I went out looking for something to back up claims and this is what I found. I formed conclusions off this and included them.
If an expert was to tell me I'm wrong and show me what I missed I would be happy to update my blog.
I included the first paragraph just to show that the post was not an expert opinion and was what I found after some research.
I don't know who you personally talked to or their knowledge level either.
I'm highly skeptical the internet sleuth method of "I did some searches, I have a handful of links, now someone has to prove me wrong." How many times have we seen that come up short?
I don't have any conclusions, mostly because I'm not confident in a layman's random few searches / ability read them in the appropriate contex could provide much in the way of conclusions.