So interesting. I love the idea. I actually don't necessarily think it's needed, but it is without a doubt worth exploring. The reason I think it isn't necessary is because I'm not sure I accept the premise that the upvote v. downvote is really so binary. For example, I think I upvote content primarily based on originality, entertainment value, and benefit to the platform. I'm sure there are other people who upvote based primarily on originality and creativity and still others who upvote primarily based on what they think other people are going to upvote. So it seems to me that on an individual level an upvote and downvote is one-dimensional, on the level of the crowd it is actually multi-dimensional. And, in fact, adding specific dimensions could decrease the overall flexibility of the system. As of right now I can adjust what I upvote and downvote in real time. If I feel there's not enough original content I can start only upvoting things that I think are original. It's not clear to me what impact having a specific "originality" vote would have on this dynamic. But this stuff is super complex so I have zero confidence in this analysis. I would concede that if the crowd were the one creating and curating these traits it's difficult to imagine it being a bad thing, I just suspect that in the end the crowd would choose the simplest upvote/downvote system. Thanks for the fascinating insight.