It is a good suggestion. I will check if something like this requires an addon or modification to implement.
There are few things to consider though, like:
- Who upvotes? I imagine only senior members or those with 1000++ posts would have to vote on this to prevent new users from rigging content votes.
- what happens to upvoted or downvoted content?
- what happens to users with downvoted content or too much of it?
We are already using something similar where user can be banned from a thread rather than whole forum.
I think senior members with 1000+ posts would be a useful starting limit to trial if we decide to implement such a feature.
Content that automatically reaches a certain net positive or net negative can be automatically "hidden" from the thread and requires deliberate steps from a user if they want to see it. E.g. a thin strip that says "this post has been downvoted by the community due to perceptions of poor quality/non-constructive, click here to verify you would like to see it".
For posts that reach a certain net negative, they may be no longer able to be replied and flags to moderators to consider for deletion.
In terms of users with too much downvoted content, perhaps at a certain limit -- e.g.: either by the number of posts of net downvotes and/or the sheer number of net downvotes accumulated from many posts -- they can automatically be flagged to moderators for consideration of warnings and/or banning for being non-constructive/poor quality.
Of course the problem with this process is that having some level of debate is useful and we don't want people to downvote people for the sake of it simply out of disagreement in a debate.
Also, implementing such a feature may be complex.
I think the best solution is to keep things simple.
1. Who can vote? Ideally, it would be members who have accumulated a certain number of
upvotes from their posts. This would prevent people from creating multiple accounts to abuse the system. If this is not possible, then simply going by post count would still go a long way toward preventing abuse. 1000 posts is probably too much and would discourage new members from participating. 100 posts might be a more reasonable threshold.
2. What happens to upvoted or downvoted content? Nothing happens to upvoted content. Posts that accumulate too many
downvotes, either by ratio or by total number, gets collapsed by default and readers will need to click on an expand button to open it. This way, the post is still there, but only those users who choose to expand it can read it.
3. What happens to users who accumulate too many downvotes? Nothing happens to them. The idea here is that this system will
assist the moderators by allowing the members to conduct their own policing of questionable content, thus freeing up the mods to take action on posts that clearly violate the forum rules, instead of having to play the role of adjudicators. Post that may or may not be designed to provoke other members can be downvoted and collapsed by the members themselves instead of bringing the moderator into the argument, who clearly have no interest in reading the back-and-forth. If a member acts in clear violation of the rules, such as posting under multiple accounts, posting X-Rated content, harassing or threatening other members through public or private messages, etc., then the moderators can step in and take action.