the problem with autocurator is... that it can mislead people. If there will be 100 autocurator, which will vote up "good author", which this time posted bullshit, that will end up with situation, where specific author will be favored for old contributions.

Maybe there should be a mechanism which punishes in long term those kind of mistakes... where lets say, 50% voters says that article is bad but you voted up anyway.

But.... what if "up vote" would be replaced by:

• grade (from 1 to 10)
• additional requirement for writing a summary or a reasons why something is good according to you

This cannot be so easily automated... and that gives the author so much more feedback.

Maybe all options should be available: upvote, summary, detail grade - and summary will be worth more.