Has there been any research done on this? I have recently noticed that if CV notices suspicious upvotes, they will negate these upvotes. But, if a user gets say almost 1600 reputation points in upvotes, and the site negates exactly 1600 reputation points, isn't this actually the bare minimum of the reputation points they received? Shouldn't they be penalized beyond this? I believe this is the bare minimum since I think the reputation points have a snowball effect. As their reputation grows bigger, people are more likely to assume this person knows what they are talking about. I realize some of this might be for meta, at the same time, it could require some statistical analysis.
How would this be determined?