This is my previous response that has still to be rebuked or acknowledged.

You propose that a jury of n number of people vote. Yet the problem is that this takes time, this takes mental energy, and mental capacity, this requires that the voters are peers, or at the very least speak the same language, this requires that we sacrifice and expose people to all kinds of content that could disturb them. Naturally, people will opt out. That will make it so that the honest few are competing with the numerous alts of the ones who gain most, the sadist and the troll, by subverting the panel. You still haven't prevented it, or done anything to slow it down, just gave the option to reverse a flag or punish twice, a bot account will revel at the thought that it can cause so much distress in so many parties simply by downvoting , and ultimately the backlog of trials will grind to a halt because to coordinate such a system you have to find active people.. You haven't really considered that the system of jurors will be vulnerable to trolls of all kinds, as anonymity and the power to punish free of consequences will sound like free beer to them, and the few that join this, they will be taxed in both time and in considering/ judging, and they cannot be directly compensated as that would be gamed by a whole other group of people, and then the anonymity of the jurors would oy be a matter of queering the chain for such transactions, detailing how much and where to it's going.

The cost is robustness in this case, as a bad actor, regardless of the costs, will abuse the system and the downvotes, and they aren't prevented either way.