This points out an obvious flaw in the voting system: everyone has a different idea of what a positive/negative vote means. For example, when I vote for a post it's because I feel that 1. the question was interesting and not obvious, 2. the information in the post was helpful/interesting, or 3. I just enjoied reading the post. On the other hand, a negative vote means either 1. the question was obvious or something that the author obviously spent no time looking for the answer before posting, 2. the solution provided is flawed, 3. the reply is off-topic or just plain annoying, etc. Perhaps what we need to do is really state what the vote is for (e.g Is it a stupid question? Do you think it's helpful?, etc.)
What would you all think about having multiple categories for voting? What I mean is, each post would have a score for 1. Accuracy, 2. Importance, 3. Other (possibly funny, etc). I know this would mean a drastically different voting system, but it would clarify things at least for me. I often come across posts with high reputations, and I have no idea why these posts in particular are so popular...
in reply to To better discern when to vote