I'm not very concerned with changes 1 or 3, but I think 2 is overcomplicated. I'd rather see a straight "one downvote equals one XP lost by the caster". A downvote is different from an upvote in obvious ways--in particular, unlike an upvote, a downvote can be cast maliciously. So my feeling is that if someone feels strongly enough about a node to downvote it, then let them put their money...er, their XP...where their mouth is.

Update: In response to Masem's comment below, let me note that using votebots to upvote a central account is improper but not malicious. There's a limit to what can be done, and I'm in favor of doing what can be done to restrict malicious behavior directed at individuals without unreasonably restricting what the general population can do. I'm also inclined to think that discouraging quick reaping of nodes is a Good Thing.

I do agree that downvotes aren't inherently malicious.

I also think it's odd that we tell people to just shrug it off when they're hit with massive XP loss through snipering but balk at a single XP-- for voluntary action--even if it's in the public good, sometimes you have to pay for it.

adamsj

They laughed at Joan of Arc, but she went right ahead and built it. --Gracie Allen