You are talking about corruptible democracy and tyranny of the masses.

Here's a better way: The owner of their decentralized domain selects their own judges, they decide among themselves who stays and goes and who judges or doesn't with the veto of the domain owner. If things get corrupted everyone migrates with their history backed up to another instance away from the corruption. The judges need a known history of proven actions that build trust. No elections necessary, though it might be nice to have 50% elected for the sake of the unproven masses.

Judges are only necessary for the problems that only arise when longterm accounts devolve or are a persistent problem. These cases should be far and few between on SaidIt, however on something as big as Reddit they could be full time jobs. Regardless, their judgements should be open and transparent and well scrutinized.

Obvious spam and asstrolls demand swift banning.

See also: fairness on SaidIt, also as 1/7 of a next-gen Phoenix Forum