Yeah, users would be moderating themselves but using our own platform which you can integrate for free and take advantage of a pool of users already fully decentralized. You could have a 0xchan subcourt for example, with fees / rewards etc governed by your users. We as a project don't have any say in the resolution of case.
How did you plan to go about it at your end?
Every user who has a stake in the system is capable of voting. We call this "Proof of Sortition", where only people are being pulled into a draft that are actually using the system and are voting in their own interest rather than external voters who do it for monetary compensation alone. At least that's how we envision it'll work out but I guess we'll see long term if that even works at all or if users are starting to try and fuck each other over.
From our tests and research so far your system will probably work until it doesn't. I.e, there will always be malicious actors looking to break it without the correct incentives not to. The biggest danger would be external griefing attacks from those that don't care about your platform. Assuming the token or stake is tradable, it's likely a large enough quantity could be bought that you have some sort of sybil or 51% attack on the voting system.
There are other projects out there other than us of course, so the final answer may be elsewhere for you guys. Assuming we attain a large enough juror pool and dispersion of tokens, it makes it harder to break. I guess if you manage to disperse the tokens in a nice manner this will mitigate but the griefing of an actor with reasonable funds is hard to stop. Our mechanism against this is forking but I'm not sure if you've considered that.
The cryptoeconomic game: It's a tough one.