I think we should look at Azumarill, given in it you have a pokemon with a solid typing (threatening popular things like Lando-T, Heatran, Keldeo, etc), good stats (factoring in Huge Power anyway), and the ability to set up to +6 while packing a priority move with STAB (which is probably the actually notable issue imo). I mean it's literally a threat that got talked about a ton in this last suspect, so I don't see why not.
Diancie-Mega could also be looked at, though I don't feel like it's really that big an issue.
[insert joke about legalizing Mollux here]
As for the topic of reqs, I have discussed before that I feel the suspect process needs changes given the differences between Singles in comparison to Doubles people have mentioned above. This being said, discouraging newer players from voting seems very much like the wrong way to go. I don't really understand why exactly posting requirements weren't in place (I was under the impression they were as usual), but I think its worth noting that when someone says their opinion and a lot of people disagree they do end up getting some heat for it, which imo intimidates some newer people into not wanting to post. I guess if that's what you want you could go for it, but it doesn't seem to address issues that I think are more important, including the facts that many people came into this suspect already decided on what to vote (which honestly defeats the point of it being a suspect test), the fact that many people are more or less posting nonsense like "its hella annoying ban it" or "I really hate it let's ban it", or even "I like it so we voting no ban" and the fact that the ladder doesn't reflect the metagame that well, which thus means it contributes to the suspect discussion very little apart from running into other people laddering for the suspect reqs. Heck, I'm looking over the Jirachi suspect discussion as I am writing and I see people shit-talking each other, like can we not.
If I had any suggestions, I wouldn't try to make ladder reqs that big a deal and instead try to focus on making discussion better and more open-minded, since that's where the most important stuff happens (seeing people posting replays against other accomplished players to strengthen their points and more ideas being thrown around would be great imo since it shows a lot more thinking is going on in the discussion). Less theory talking and more in-battle examples would do a lot of good as well, considering how often in the suspect I saw posts discussing all these odd and confusing scenarios without just visual demonstrating them in a realistic environment. People should do that more please. I wouldn't recommend forcing discussion posts to get requirements though because if anything it encourages everyone just saying the same thing to get their reqs in without having to put in the actual thought around whether a threat needs to be banned or not.
If we were to do anything about the issue of people who don't know the meta changing votes I would recommend some sort of requirement for how long you have been involved in Doubles discussion on forums and such, since that would mean someone couldn't just suspect ladder out of nowhere, get reqs, and then vote with minimal tier knowledge. That is imo the compromise that off the top of my head is most inclusive towards new players, though like I have said the more notable players would need to be friendly and encouraging if this were to work out. It also kinda feels a bit elitist to restrict a suspect like this to begin with, so I can't say I would push for anything like this.