> 1. Super-incentivize snitching. Reward whistle-blowers to the point where it becomes an easy decision. Not only monetary, but with honor and with medals. Make it the new "right thing to do" in public service. Fight corruption. Easy sell.
They did this behind the Iron Curtain. At one point in Romania, 30% of the population were regularly reporting to the Secret Police. Wonder what the percent of false positives were?
Intentional false positives need to be super-disincentivized.
If all is well, the system would be open enough that the whistle blower can blow their whistle in the open. And everyone would support the investigation, and the parties on both sides. Eventually truth does need to exist regarding the why and what was reported.
Although, this wouldn't work where:
1. There are still enough bad guys who would punish this person in the locker room.
2. Situations where everyone is breaking the law, but enforcement is always with discretion. Like ebay where most listings violate something but aren't given a look until "someone" reports them. Or like overlooking jaywalking until someone of "interest" starts walking.
There must be other scenarios, but we can be on top of them.
What you describe is a DDoS scenario for a system you support.
I, with all my good will, can "blow a whistle" on a person I don't like, subconsciously or not. Just because I don't like him. And the defence of whistle blowers is exactly that - a good will.
Why not add the patcher reward? He who rants out the gamble-ability of a system, reaps all the rewards of his fellow follow up loophole sneakers for patching?
He/She who steps to late up and trys to milk a loophole/perverse incentive pays.
They did this behind the Iron Curtain. At one point in Romania, 30% of the population were regularly reporting to the Secret Police. Wonder what the percent of false positives were?