One of the huge difference between PerlMonks and Slashdot is that Slashdot has always bowed to the whole "free speech" thing, since a lot of their topics, in order to get a valid, balanced viewpoint (as if that's ever been possible anyway), require the voice of people that don't want to be known.
in reply to reason for VOTE?
PerlMonks does not suffer from that, and as a result, they can severely restrict what the anonymous can do, and can reasonably rely on a person's level or XP to determine the quality of that person's Perl expertise. I hope to God that PM doesn't change its policies to better reflect the "free speech" policies of Slashdot, because we've all seen what happens.
I feel just the opposite. Accountability would only mean people would not vote for fear of retaliation. Bad sentiment will develop. If someone wants to post a note explaining why they voted one way or the other, or why they marked their node for consideration (which, I understood, was to be done only in extreme situations), they're free to do so, but I think forcing accountability for your voting actions would hurt the voting process more than help it. Though don't get me wrong: I'd love to figure out who keeps going around and randomly -- posts for no apparent reason, or just because they don't like the person.