Interesting proposition, but the majority of its design is flawed. Responding to the design doc: Truples are common in graph databases, however both gun and Neo4J use more property graphs (while Neo4j has mandatory edge nodes, gun does not), which in my personal opinion is actually useful while triples are more of an academic thing (note here, I am biased because I am the author of gun). He chucks conflict resolution…
In the several months since I wrote that I've changed my mind on a lot of things. The new design uses a sharded architecture (on hash of topic id) with nodes having a specific keyspace. This makes it much more robust and allows for actual consistency. Since all data will be treated equally, there will no longer be a penalty for less used data.
The main reason I originally thought that less used data should be penalized, is that it takes up a lot of resources for things that aren't used by the majority of users. However, that's a hard thing to track and makes it difficult to propagate inserts.
As for triples vs property graphs, they're functionally equivalent. I'm using triples because they've been shown to work quite well at scale such as Google's massive Knowledge Graph.