Can I let you know what I find a little troublesome about this idea?
Primarily, it's the inference that there is a group of people qualified to respond to someone's questions, and another group of people who are unqualified to respond.
Firstly, I think that's problematic because it can create elitism amongst the "chosen few", but secondly, it then puts an onus on the staff here to select that "chosen few", and by what criteria would we do that? We've never met people in person, we have no idea about the maturity of their practice beyond how we see them behave here at Dhamma Wheel. It also assumes that the moderators and administrators know
the Dhamma, and can therefore spot others who know
the Dhamma too. All of which is the pre-cursor to doing the E-Sangha trick of separating "dhamma" from "adhamma", according to the personal preferences and beliefs of those in charge... and I'm not comfortable with that.
What we do have though is the Discovering Theravada section, which is where newbies and those of other traditions can ask questions of the community. We moderate this section more closely than most, because we make a concerted effort to remove papanca and also that if someone gives a response that does not seem in accord with Theravada, we lean on them quite hard to back it up, lest the asker of the question mistakenly take their word to be a reflection of Theravada Dhamma.
In my opinion, meta-discussion can be managed through other means.