I've seriously considered it. It helps to have been an active editor who understands how the place works and has seen the push and pull that prevents such systemic biases ... of course, there is a systemic "bias" toward veridical claims, which is as it should be. That doesn't mean that everything there is true, but there is an active process that tends to eliminate what isn't--sort of like science. But at WP there are numerous adversarial ideological cadres who have to at least play-act at good faith in order to achieve consensus, which results in a lot truth being stated in quite muted qualified ways. It's not perfect but it's hard to come up with a way to do better.