Brief comment, elaborating on the point of the post: one factor in how reliable a signal is comes from how hard it is to fake the signal. The meta-declaration is a very weak signal - anyone can say the words "I examined large amounts of evidence and deduced that the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is far superior to the collapse theories", and equally anyone can say "I examined large amounts of evidence and deduced that the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is far inferior to the collapse theories". What is expensive to fake, and therefore good evidence of sincerity, is to write a series of essays discussing the relevant evidence and key elements of the analysis leading to the particular conclusion. Only in the latter case can third parties can check your evidence and your reasoning, and anything they discover about these screens off everything anyone can say about your trustworthiness.