The idea would be a fixed price for an upvote. Not to create a market, but for two other advantages.
It creates a cost for bots and hence a cost for massive spam campaigns. And it creates compensation to the system for processing and displaying the content.
As for people selling their vote, this occurs even without costs in the form of vote brigading, and seems pretty controllable on e.g. reddit.
The market isn’t the price of the vote, it’s the price to buy someone’s vote. That’s a race to the bottom.
Right now the cheapest option is a bot. A perfect anti-bot solution shifts this so that the cheapest option is the global poor.
Zoom out, is the problem is manipulation not bots. Bots are just the best weapon today. Does this new scheme present a sustainable solution to manipulation?
I don’t believe it does. over time, power and wealth will be more able to pay the per vote cost and raising it will disproportionately deny real peoples voice.
Looping back, this is why I asked if any of it was needed once we assume the presence of a working moderation scheme (which you credit as the protection today from vote buying).
As for people selling their vote, this occurs even without costs in the form of vote brigading, and seems pretty controllable on e.g. reddit.