This is an exiting possibility. Partially because it taps into a natural desire for a subset of humans to curate. This will be enjoyable work for people genuinely committed to accurate attribution. The main problem I see is in gaming. People boosting something because they either, a) personally financially benefit from boosting, b) are being paid to boost (vote buying), or c) are facing some nebulous (or not) social pressure from groups that have a financial interest to boost (this is probably the hardest, and will never be eradicated completely).
This is an instance of a general problem around boosting, or voting (interacting) in general. And I’d be curious to hear ideas on how to fix this. I keep coming back to some human dispute resolution mechanism, like an Aragon Court. Only other humans are likely able to make subtle distinctions necessary to call out abuse. Perhaps another active role in the system such as a “cred defender”, who roams the system actively searching out patterns of corruption and calling them to judgement and possible punishment (slashing of cred). Certainly there is a natural desire in a subset of humans to be journalists, judge, jury, etc. But more fun, because people are directly impacted. Like people that follow Serial and chase real-life criminals and fight to free the innocent, but less entertaining and more entertaining at the same time, because while the stakes are lower, they impact your day-to-day life more than a far off event.