In a word, no.

We can work to encourage and facilitate quality content and discussion, but ensuring it is more than I can pledge. IMO it would be dishonest to do otherwise. I can honestly tell you that a quality experience on Hubski is my goal, and my desire for quality content and discussion is why the site exists. I will work hard to foster and preserve it. But, I can't guarantee that I won't fail. If I did, I would be me BSing us both.

Hubski's de-centralized design is part of an effort to make the site scalable. In general terms, we are trying to give users the ability to determine their own Hubski experience. You decide who you follow, and you decide who you share posts with. The working hypothesis is that Hubski will scale better as a platform rather than a place. If it is easy to find quality content, and easy to ignore unwanted content, organic and dynamic communities may emerge. We are going for stability via flexibility. Your experience may overlap with some of these communities, and it might not overlap with others.

IMHO, bottom-up approaches can be elegant, whereas top-down ones typically cannot. When problems arise, I'm always thinking about bottom-up solutions first.

As an aside, I think clarity of vision is what often makes or breaks these sites.

BTW, it's Hubski, not Hubuski! :)