True and that would be a good idea, but also someone that flags because they just don't like you and flags your post as spam when it is not should not in my opinion be able to effect your earnings as the flag is incorrect. Flagging the flagger seems counterproductive and time consuming.

But I know I would look through some of the trending posts and see what the reason for flagging was.

I said it a few times here, but creating a downvote button separate from a flag button could help solve this.

While @dollarvigilante did not plagiarize content @berniesanders has the right to downvote content (with the same sort of dialogue/ checkmarks repetive, disagreed, disrespectful). This would effect effect the posters end dollar amount but not their reputation.

The option to flag content could be used in conjunction with a downvote so a user would know first why their content was downvoted and why it wsa flagged. Flagging should effect reputation, but downvoting only the end total sum of money you receive.

I think flagging should be used for more extreme cases of abuse than someone just being jealous or flagging because they don't like the poster.

While it would kill his reputation, @berniesanders could go through and find a monnow he didn't like and go through and flag everything with no reason. He would be foolish to do so, bu he is not even required to say why he would do that.

The same system could optionally be used for upvoting (humor, engaging etc.) and you could see a metric of what people most enjoyed about your posts and comments.

All of these systems should be easy to use and intuitive so as not to discourage new users or confuse them.

A consensus on what type of content deserves a flag should be proposed and while it will never reach 100% agreement, it will still be better than the current system.