As a new baker, something that really stood out to me:
I'm baking for the entire community, so of course intending to set aside my own personal interests / preferences about what's notable. I come with years of experience doing research. As an anon, I've filtered through lots of sources, learned to trust some and distrust others, etc. If I've personally found specific reason to distrust a source, I'll be inclined to steer away from it when baking (not exclude but the specific item has a higher bar to clear.) But as an anon, there are LOTS of rabbit holes I've never explored, topics I've never investigated, sources I have no opinion about. As an anon I read what others say … if something is outside my interest and expertise, I'm letting others lead (and on some topics that bore me, don't really pay attention.)
That seems well and good when switching over baking - I'm listening to everything and gathering notables for the community instead of writing "what I like." But I was surprised at how difficult it was to make judgments in areas outside my personal background as an anon. In setting aside my own personal preferences and baking for the community, I was faced with the contradictory pulls of (a) not rejecting a nominated notable because the topic was of no interest to me, therefore trusting nominations, and (b) not including a nominated notable that's a slide, therefore needing to personally vet notables as worthwhile. Yes I can detect when a UID seems shilly, but there's more of a gray area than you'd expect when not baking - what happens when an anon innocently starts taking a slide in an area where I don't have the background to recognize it, or anons are nominating a site with a borderline reputation that I don't personally know about? It's hard to efficiently reject borderline non-notables or questionable sources without relying too much on my own personal interests and knowledge, so the pressure to be "non-shilly" can also backfire into "baker only posting what interests baker". And I don't want to do that.
The upshot is that the tendency to view newness as shilly does act as a deterrent to baking, in the sense that it comes across as "let the experienced hands do it". (I'm not letting myself freeze up on that, and baking anyway - but it may help to hear what new bakers experience.) I've been grateful to have friendly advice when anons realized I was new, giving comments about the reputation of sources, etc. Baking is a good experience. But since it's something to take seriously, I've been reflecting on these aspects and seeing what there is to learn. And when there are baking controversies, reading over what's said to think about how I'd handle that anon input.