I do approve as well. You are right, it becomes really necessary, the current situation is not suitable. The #1 and #2 are quite good. The #3 is worth a try. Maybe I would add that the voice of an editor is worth a 3, which is equivalent to the actual system. I realize that it is maybe implicit in your proposal.
Maybe, you could have also a prudent #4 that allows an editor to revert a submission that would have been approved by NON-editors, if the submission happens to get strong protest(s) afterwards. Just for security.
Dear Fergus
I do approve as well. You are right, it becomes really necessary, the current situation is not suitable. The #1 and #2 are quite good. The #3 is worth a try. Maybe I would add that the voice of an editor is worth a 3, which is equivalent to the actual system. I realize that it is maybe implicit in your proposal.
Maybe, you could have also a prudent #4 that allows an editor to revert a submission that would have been approved by NON-editors, if the submission happens to get strong protest(s) afterwards. Just for security.