I think I was one of the first to bring up this concept to solve the higher cost of negative curation problem Aka. Downvoting/flagging being more expensive than upvotes.
It has since then been discussed a lot as one of the preferred way to achieve more balanced cost between Up and Down-Votes curation so I want to explain visually what I had in mind.
Reddit is one the most similar website to Steemit and a good example to learn from. A Study made on Reddit voting behaviors showed that about 10% of all votes were downvotes. Since Reddit has no direct monetary incentives and that the up and downvotes are anonymized it is good starting point for choosing a UP:DOWN ratio. In that case 9:1 resulting in 10 independent flagging pool)
Starting from an example of a user with 94.6% of his voting power left.
(check yours at https://steemd.com/@USERNAME)
Same original situation under the new proposed system
A future upgrade could allow for delegating the voting pools independently. So users who do not want to downvote could decide to delegate their "downpower" to one of the more organized initiatives like @Steemcleaners