I think this is the best thing to come out of all the recent drama.
I agree entirely with your proposal, the logic behind it and the method you wish to use to employ it.
The warning system will ensure people have sufficient warnings, while allowing the down vote system to be used appropriately as intented for plagerizm and bad content.
I applaud your work on this and look forward to it being ratified
What is "bad" content?
How long will be your definition of "bad" ???
We will have to address this point certainly.
I actually phrased that badly forgive the pun, but my meaning was basically abusive content or content that may be frowned apon by the community.
The community will need to develop its own guidelines in this regard.
The proposed DV rules are just a starting point.
My hope is that we will be able to create a transparency system where each post will have meaningful metrics about the author's posting and voting habits displayed with the post, along with direct links to supporting info that might cause a tribe member to think twice about upvoting.
I believe up-front (i.e. on the post) transparency will go a long way towards limiting 'bad actors' from taking advantage of tribe members.
Taking this kind of stance is never popular but it needs to be done for the greater good of the community, ensuring that when someone calls out another with verifiable proof will ensure that the community has a much better prospective on a given situation.
I believe your proposal has valid merit and I will support t, with what value I have, rewards are great but they mean nothing without transparency