Rigor is an interesting point. Do we prefer to have a flawed, but slightly useful, post now - or - do we prefer to wait a month or two for a squeaky clean post with all issues worked out?
So it wouldn't need more than a few articles, like "nginx + ssl = works like a charm", or "nginx has better SSL support than Apache". It would not matter whether those were actually correct, just a single article of questionable quality would be sufficient.
"nginx does not suck at ssl"
That way, it is possible to get some initial feedback and maybe even some good hints that help speeding up the analysis. In the best case, the announced analysis could become a collaboration by multiple authors.