Thanks for your reply.
An initial knowledge test, (subject independent) would include a test to prive you understand the methodology of the consensus voting mechanism.
eg. That revealing your identity or that of another person would considerably negatively affect your reputation score.
Re a subject dependent vote:
Eg. A proposal to change the chain code from proof of stake to a combination of proof of work and proof of stake.
If potential voters do not understand what pow & pos mean, and the implications of the change, there vote will be meaningless. And bearing in mind there would be positive effects on Reputation for voting for a proposal which achieves consensus and likely token rewards both for joining a meeting and for voting for a proposal which achieves consensus, it is likely that some if not many would join the meeting even if they did not understand the terms & consequences. And, this would increase the number of attendees and the time taken for the meetings.
The idea is that for knowledge tests, written/video material would be offered to give the information needed to pass a multiple choice test.
Does that make sense & if so do you agree that knowledge tests might be necessary for some subjects?
Choosing a logo design (for example - if that were deemed necessary for an all members consensus vote) would not need a knowledge test, but i think i could come up with MANY more examples where it would be necessary.
It does have a logic to it. Will have to consider it more deeply to be able to answer your question though.