If this was implemented, new users would never upvote, just as they very rarely downvote as it is now. I don't think there's a good reason to "fix" this problem, other than removing the -2 points for downvoting, (a better solution to prevent spam downvoting allow staff to easily view the source of downvotes on a larger scale rather than on a by-post basis, allowing them to easily see if people are spamming and punish/ban accordingly) which would encourage people to use them more often. But points don't really do anything anyway. Nobody's been promoted to expert by way of points in years, iirc, so worst case scenario that number should be changed back to 10k again. I feel like there are some users that tend to get more upvotes than other users, though that's just a public perception/popularity contest, which we can't really control unless all posts were made anonymous. Could just be my imagination though.
A system by which votes are assigned value on the basis of how many votes the person giving votes has already cast would be interesting, and I think would better signify how helpful users are on the site by their points, as users that give out lots of upvotes would have votes that aren't worth much and users that don't give out many would have votes that are worth more; ie, if users X, who upvotes everyone's answers, gives you a vote, it's worth less than if user Y, who rarely votes on anything, upvotes your answer. I think this would be silly, though.
