I'm not sure how this would work, in practice. Let's say you are included by 3 DT1 members and 5 DT2 members, but you are also excluded by 10 DT2 members. At DT1 you have +3 and so are included. But at DT2 you would have -5 and so would be excluded. Overall between DT1 and DT2 you have -2, so although you are net included by DT1 (+3), are DT2 now able to overrule DT1?
I think this over-complicates things. If someone on DT2 is doing something stupid, simply appeal to their DT1 "sponsor(s)", and if that doesn't work, open a thread to appeal to other DT1 members to exclude them.
A solution to this could be an addition to this algorithm that DT2 members (who are as a "majority" excluding a DT2 member) must be trusted from different DT1 members.
I am a big proponent of DT2 members requiring inclusions from 2 different DT1 members prior to becoming DT2 at all.