Who would decide who gets rejected? And how do you protect against malicious use of tools that are designed to prevent spam? There seem to be lots of negative issues on steemit arising from its economic model and rules around voting and rewards, but from what I've read it may also be very difficult to find a way to change the rules to get the desired outcomes. And that is assuming that everyone even agrees on those outcomes (which is highly unlikely). I keep of Hayek's view that "the curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design." Perhaps one approach is take a kind of Nasim Taleb approach to minimizing overall risk by spawning sub-steemits that experiment with different rules. This is happening in some sense already with organically organized groups on steemit, however those groups are limited because they cannot change the fundamental rules.