Oh I don't know how much is altruistic on his part, I have my own difference of opinion with him on some of his voting down voting issues.
What I would like s to see the pop-up down vote box to come back only highly modified. I would do a heck of a lot more down voting if I could direct where my down vote went and for what reason. One more step in a down vote is not going to kill anyone other than down vote bots.
Down vote box pops up, 5 check boxes available. Pick one. Example:
Box one: Plagiarism (Author takes full hit of down vote)
Box two: Spam (Author take full hit of down vote)
Box three: Excessive rewards (Top five up voters take full brunt and receive no curation rewards).
Box 4 and Box 5 can be what others want, the three above are the ones I feel most strongly about.
Box three full explanation:
When people cast down votes the down voter if a whale has to be pretty careful as @smooth has been in trying to avoid reputation ruination. When it comes to reward pool abuse those individuals just as the spammers and plagiarist deserve what they get. So 50% of the down vote value for rewards and reputation should go on the top voter. The remaining 50% of down vote power should be split equally among the other four top voters. This will cause the small account trail followers to re-think who they follow vote trail wise. The author of the post would lose out on the reward amount but their reputation would survive intact and they would know it was not them that was down voted, just the top 5 or less up voters that were trying to play the system.
So far every time I have bought this up it has been shot down as that it would not work, or if we do that for down votes then we should have boxes for up votes, that argument does not fly, a down vote is used to counter a negative action and up votes are positive action. There are very few societies that do not differentiate between a positive action and a negative action, in other words people do not need to account for their positive action only their negative actions such as robbing a bank.
I like that idea. It seems like a winner to me. I don't know about the mechanics or coding that'd be involved, but at least it promotes less destructive behavior.