I highly agree with the first one. But I think the assumption that people almost always use flagging to improve the platform is wrong. Many only use it as a power tool to pressure others to act the way they like. In cases like this it is mandatory for negative power to be small so only a crowd can use it for applying pressure. Even so, it's still prune to abuse to power groups in the community.
If we are going to make a mature product we shouldn't rely on manual reporting like down-votes anymore. There should be better ways to approach the problem.
I'd be interested in hearing example of
Isn't it also possible to incentivize people to act the way you want by rewarding them ?
What else do you expect from a dumb blockchain "automated reporting" ? Flagging isn't reporting it's down-voting.
Probably you know about all examples of these sorts: https://steemit.com/steem/@heimindanger/don-t-use-vote-selling-bots-use-promoted-instead-a-bot-that-upvotes-you-when-you-burn-money#@napkin/re-napkin-re-gavvet-re-gtg-re-heimindanger-don-t-use-vote-selling-bots-use-promoted-instead-a-bot-that-upvotes-you-when-you-burn-money-20170712t210356197z
A blockchain is a software and mature softwares are not supposed to stay dumb. Automation over blockchain is very possible and some teams already combined it with high intelligence behaviors of machine learning. Something like that in my opinion should be the goal not adjusting the values of upvoting and down-voting times to times. It just doesn't work.
meep