I think Good Vs Bad scales somewhat perfectly proportionate, but it seem you think that isn't the case, that it's relatively like so (good vs bad) because we are tiny. I guess the only thing is to wait and see.
I don't think that you've accurately considered what you're suggesting. You seem to think that forcing people to spam a post or a comment every so many minutes so that they can continue to be jerks will make that spam post or comment some kind of insurance, that now the benefit of retaliating against them will change something. I don't see how that could be the case, considering that being Downvoted is of no consequence to them to not be a jerk, they can keep on being a jerk even if they are downvoted, how could that be consequential at all, unless consequences don't mean anything, or mean so little.
Um, I think you've confused my suggestion with someone else's. I agreed with them about it being an interesting idea but one that I didn't think would work due to the points that you also said. However, I answered so many replies I might well have accidentally agreed to the wrong thing by accident. Anyway, my position on requiring a post of comment to upvote or downvote is exactly the end as yours.
My suggestion was that up/down voting gave some sort of cost... Perhaps proportional to the amount of vests that would be allocated. However, this would mean that downvotes cost disproportionately more as there would not be any 'anti-curation' rewards. But I think that these actions shouldn't be effectively cost free.
Edit: Yup, definitely my fault! Apologies. I had answered without making myself clear. I think I had made those points (same as yours) in a different thread... Somewhere.