After looking at the question the OP asked on PPCG I think there wouldn't be any harm in lowering the rep requirement for Meta.
The single answer to that question states that there hasn't been any spam in the last 30 days and the comments to the question and answer indicate that PPCG doesn't have to deal with real spam on their Meta Site, only with a few users who mistook Meta for the Main Site or for the Sandbox. This is something that might happen, but we already have this "problem" occasionally on our Main Site where people ask questions like:
And quite some similar questions (15 not deleted questions in total if my search query is correct).
I would imagine that the amount of misplaced posts wouldn't drastically increase just because we allow new users to post something on Meta.
The advantage would be that in some cases new users might post their Meta questions directly on the Meta Site instead of the Main Site, where we would have to migrate them. And, of course, new users could potentially give the Sandbox a try. As apaul34208 noted the traffic on Meta is slow enough that a few new users using Meta shouldn't be too much to handle.
Considering these points I think it would be a good idea to lower the rep requirement.
I don't know how big this change would be viewed, so maybe we could start with some sort of "test phase" of for example 1 month:
- We change the rep requirement to 1
- We update the text in the help center to show that for a test phase everyone can post on Meta with a link to a Meta Post with the relevant details
- The Meta Post should have a community wiki as an answer to note good and bad things that happened in the time. This way we can have a review after a month to see if this works for us. The community wiki should include events (with relevant links) like:
- A new user posted a question draft in the Sandbox
- A new user posted a Meta question on Meta
- A new user mistook Meta for Main/Sandbox
- Spam on Meta
After the "test phase" we should have a look at the community wiki and maybe have a review discussion to get the sentiment of the community.
- How do we weigh the success of the "test phase"?
- Was it good that the question drafts were posted in the Sandbox first?
- Was there an increase in spam?
- Did new users get enough feedback fast enough on their first posts, as Meta doesn't have as many active users as the Main Site and no "First Posts" review queue?
- Was the amount of posts enough to really care about the issue for now or did nobody use this new feature?