|Problems? Is your data what you think it is?|
I also have a problem with item 1.
I feel that if someone has earned the right to cast votes, they should be allowed to use those as they see fit.
I think PerlMonks works best when most votes are upvotes. If that's what you want to achieve, it's fine to state that and encourage it - for example using $vtavg not only to give the voter a risk of XP loss, but also to reduce the number of votes they can cast in the future (as was proposed in History now influences voting).
There is no need to attempt to infer malicious intent, and characterize a perceived pattern as abuse.
When I cast a vote, I want to be free to do so without having to worry whether I risk triggering an opaque pattern recognition system. I would rather not vote at all than risk jail for having voted in ways someone in retrospect decided was the wrong way.
In reply to Re: RFC: Policy regarding abuses of the voting system