“Strategic” voting is pretty much unavoidable, since voting has some cost (however mild). It makes sense to vote when you think it will make a useful contribution, by expressing a different POV than other LessWrong contributors would. Does this make scores less representative? It’s not clear that it does—how many people would care if some unambiguously good comment is at, say, +17 as opposed to +19 because some users just didn’t bother to vote it up?
“Strategic” voting is pretty much unavoidable, since voting has some cost (however mild). It makes sense to vote when you think it will make a useful contribution, by expressing a different POV than other LessWrong contributors would. Does this make scores less representative? It’s not clear that it does—how many people would care if some unambiguously good comment is at, say, +17 as opposed to +19 because some users just didn’t bother to vote it up?