My question to you: how do you solve the moderation staffing requirements? Imagine if every post that got downvoted was instead reported. The solution here assumes that 'report' sends a post to some nether realm where nobody has to deal with it ever again; but all it's doing is passing the buck, and I don't think that's viable unless the moderation team is the same size as the userbase.
As someone suggested, move the post with too many reports to an approval list, find the sweet spot between participants and the amount of reports required.
Imagine if every post that got downvoted was instead reported.
People won't report as much ass they downvote. The requirement for a few words explanation is enough. And a mod will quickly find out who is abusing the function. People here downvote because they made a habit on reddit to use it as a "disagree click'ngo."
If you then mandate a sixty-character comment, then nobody's going to bother reporting anyway, and you end up with a worse problem..
60 characters is only an example. A few words of explanation will suffice. Or even a clicklist, like reddit, "why do you report?"
Now look at the score I have on this submission: plus 5 minus 9. Do you think that this subject should be hidden from discussion under the pretext that some people take it personally or somethin'? I say no. but do you think that they would have gone so far as reporting my post? Certainly not, for what reason? "The guy stinks!"
The downvote is way too easy to use and is constantly misused if not plain and simple weaponized. So what would you suggest? How do you deal with people abusing the downvote button? And how do you deal with the clickbaity stuff pushing the more interesting stuff down the frontpage?