anti
expert

Truth has to be visible despite the discomfort of being exposed to it, and it needs to be challenged because no one has a monopoly over it. Without it, society's shadow gets pushed further into the abyss — and this is terminal to a civilization's health.

This is why we need Anti-experts.

Anti-expert is someone who possesses the knowledge & competency (sometimes, even qualifications) in their chosen field of expression, but is ignored or shutdown by institutions, media & the mob.  
 
Even if some of them are not shut down/ignored, there is a blatant issue with being able to access their body of thought & work, in either an organized or well contextualized manner.

Platforms like Wikipedia are an embarrassment when it comes to the access of contentious/challenging topics that would do well from reduced censorship and establishment-friendly takes.

As for X (formerly Twitter) the noise to signal ratio will remain the issue. Its creator incentive structure is now algorithmically geared towards max engagement, which will muddle what is truly relevant with what's financially incentivized.
 
Anti-expert as a platform is about high quality curations of the life works of competent thinkers (published by them and/or their supporters), with cross referencing capability (i.e., others talking about the same/similar topics), opposing/contrary views (if any), the ability to seek clarifications, & finding overlaps and/or new insights (complementary exploration) from other fields.

This is NOT a social or commentary network. The core of it is about easy accessibility and connecting of relevant information.