I don't disagree on having proper reviews, actually the opposite: my
topic was meant to be provocative and I'm very glad of your reaction.
But I don' t understand your "no" in this context after my comment
which is specifically commenting on the game proposal: what I'm saying
is that if there is a chance to be penalized when doing a review,
people will not feel inclined to jump on the task eagerly, which is
what we often need for more expedited merges.

Looking at it in terms of game theory, It might work fine if the
prospect of benefiting out of [doing a good review] outweighs the
penalty of doing it wrong.