@Horton, I'll just provide a couple of comments from a lay man's perspective.
First, I completely get what you initially set out to do and continue to do with this site. I'm 50/50 on the idea of somehow indentifying the skiing capabilities of each person. I'm not against it, but not entirely sure it's necessary. If a person takes the time to hang out here, it doesn't take very long to get some sort of idea who most people are and their skiing ability/coaching ability. I can read a thread having to do with technique and know who I will give more credence to with their comments. After a watching for a while, I don't need to see some form of skier rating to figure out whose comments I pay close attention to. Besides, most folks will begin their comments with some sort of qualifier like, "I'm at the same level as you..." or "I'm a -28 skier...". And to take it a step further, ball count doesn't necessarily equate to coaching ability. I think there's a couple of -35 guys who can identify and communicate concepts more clearly than some that get into -38 and beyond. That's true in any sport.
As for the Advanced Topic idea, I really enjoy sitting back and watching "round table discussions" from those who are really advanced. I don't like the idea though, that the conversation is completely closed. Someone at -22 or -28 (I would not include these in this advanced category) might have a legitimate question as to how the concept being discussed will help them move to -32 or beyond. Having an Advanced Topic category is great and I think most of us who aren't qualified for that group will know that and would be happy to sit back and watch. I just don't like the completely closed concept because, although I wouldn't pretend to know enough to interject my ideas, I might have a good question relating to the topic for the advanced folks that are talking/discussing.
Great site @Horton. It's working well and I know I've learned a ton from hanging here.