Should Stack Overflow be expanded to include user-submitted papers and articles, which can then rake in higher scores based upon the quality of their work? Authors of tutorials/papers could be granted the "Author Badge," and maybe even the "Golden Educator" with 10+ articles averaging 10+ upvotes.
The great thing about Stack Overflow is the community, which could determine the acceptability of any article, and post comments/corrections to content found therein.
Why? Authors here carry weight. If I see that Jon Skeet wrote an article on .NET 4.5 and C#, I will be more compelled to read it than I would Joe Smith's blog. The community here is already providing quick-and-simple answers to each other every second - why not stop playing catch-up with each other and actually practice some offensive-education?
Besides, I like the model of up-voting questions to illustrate quality. I don't know of any tutorial site even remotely similar to what Stack Overflow would offer. All authors have a history of activity, reputation, etc. Their papers are each weighed independently by its subject matter, clarity, and usefulness.
I honestly see great potential in this. Sure, it's kind of been done before, but then again, Stack Overflow wasn't completely original - and yet it blew the competition away when it launched.