I say don't try. One of the problems askreddit and other subs like showerthoughts had was that you had to follow an extremely restrictive set of posting guidelines to even have your post stay up.

I think we're better off just letting the community upvote/downvote to maintain quality, rather than trusting powermods.

Karma bots for reselling accounts

Asking for upvotes in the title, e.g. "upvote if you think..."

The toxic behaviour found in a lot of subreddits. Its an inevitable thing that it brews in communities or instances, but it'd be nice if Lemmy held itself above repeating the patterns of the lowest common denominedditor.

mistaking dialectal differences for bad grammar

Subreddits called news that only shows news from a single perspective. Sure if users only upvote a single perspective that's fine but mods shouldn't remove things they don't like if it's news.

Headlines that don't match the article. That always ends in rage baiting.

Negativity. It's ok to criticize, but there was something about Reddit that encouraged people to bash each others until one side wins instead of agreeing to disagree and move on.

I said this in a similar thread, and it relates to some of the comments here about echo chambers and the like.

Allowing users to suppress virality whenever the feed is sorted by “Hot” or “Active” or “Top” by weighing the value of a post by the popularity of the community it comes from. This way, posts with a small amount of upvotes from a small community can be considered as equally “Hot” as those from bigger communities.

Ideally it’s be an option in selecting the sorting of your feed, but I think even if users only use it sometimes it will help diversify feeds here … and be something Reddit never did too AFAIU.

If meta-communities were to also arrive and be combined with this, you could end up with a really powerful set of feed controls.

EDIT: spelling (vitality -> virality)

I have exactly zero confidence that these or other bad pattern will not emerge as the community grows larger