It only *seems* skewed, because there are two factors which haven't yet reached an upper bound -- the number of regular users of the site, and the number of available votes a good post can receive. As those increase (the second somewhat dependent upon the first), so will the number of points awarded to the best nodes.
in reply to RE: Scalability of the voting system
in thread Scalability of the voting system
It would be nice if voters dug through the archives to find some underappreciated gems (there are a couple of Snippets I'm incredibly proud of, as they're good technical hacks) instead of hitting up the newest ones.
Of course, as the number of votes available to J. Random Regular increases, unless the total number of really good posts (as opposed to mediocre) will have to increase, or he'll vote up posts that are less deserving than before. When you only have five votes per day, and thirty new posts, you'll save your votes for the gems. When you have 25 votes per day and 30 new posts, you can afford to be less discriminating.
Perhaps the act of voting shouldn't grant experience -- and being voted up should grant more.