From the perspective of voters, this is a terrible system. If a district votes one way and gets their result flipped because of this system, then they're unambiguously not being represented by someone they want.
From the perspective of voters, the current system is also terrible, as districts are deliberately being designed so that one party cannot win them, despite that party having a majority across the whole state.
I would hope that the majority of voters would see that they are getting better (proportional) representation under this system (even if that representation wouldn't always be as local as it would be for the lucky few districts that aren't gerrymandered into irrelevance in the current system).
In any case, by changing the game theory (removing any incentive to gerrymander districts), my expectation is that in practice no results would get flipped, so no one would experience any bad effect attributed to this system.
I would hope that the majority of voters would see that they are getting better (proportional) representation under this system (even if that representation wouldn't always be as local as it would be for the lucky few districts that aren't gerrymandered into irrelevance in the current system).
In any case, by changing the game theory (removing any incentive to gerrymander districts), my expectation is that in practice no results would get flipped, so no one would experience any bad effect attributed to this system.