I have already made my views known to Tom, but I will summarize them again here:
I believe that a system such as Tom proposes would not, ultimately, be significantly more effective than the Titan system, provided the Titan system makes a few changes. Some of these changes are already underway—for instance, the Titans can now request feedback/ask questions of either the reporter or the reportee.
Ultimately, I think what is needed is some sort of system whereby a "Titan pool" is maintained, with "potential Titans" selected based on some criterion (perhaps trust medals, for instance, though not necessarily that) and added to the pool. A certain number of "potential Titans" would be active each month (or quarter, or whatever). These would be determined based on a rating system that allows players to state whether they feel a particular Titan decision was fair—active Titans rated low would be returned to the pool, replaced by higher-rated or new members of the pool.
This would allow a much greater fraction of the playerbase to understand the Titan system, and thereby give them greater investment in both the Titan system and the game itself.
