Thanks for your comment, @joe.public. I myself consider myself a lean startupper and as such I'm constantly observing and reactionarry in approach. Everything brings learnings, most definitely failures.
Interesting is also this:
What many people may not realize is that Ned and Dan originally set out to design an up-vote-only, positive platform. They felt that the negative experience of "losing money by popular vote" would harm user experience. The system of up and down votes that we have to day is out of necessity not desire. We have to design systems that are fully compatible with the laws of human nature (game theory). Source
I'm not changing the rules as such. I'm looking at integrating a more democratic system. Also because Steem Inc constantly refers to our democratic license. The change would be in order to protect. Just like every government has as task: to make sure its citizens can thrive.
I don't think we can do away with downvotes, nor should we. Google still combats spam on a daily basis, that despite hundreds of thousands of hours invested in it already. And even when that issue is solved, we still should have the possibility to downvote/flag/report.
Yet, the simple fact that money is involved changes the position, and role, of the flagger and their action.