Interesting. When I looked at their example poll - what was interesting was I started to think tactically - as votes now cost - I'm much more interested in not

Interesting. When I looked at their example poll - what was interesting was I started to think tactically - as votes now cost - I'm much more interested in not wasting votes on issues that aren't going to be closely fought. ie Even if I had strong feelings about topic X - should I vote if I already can guess the outcome of the vote - surely smarter to avoid wasting that vote and focus on something that's likely to be closely contested? So you end up with a secondary market in information about how the vote is or is likely to go. Ideally, as a user, what I'd like is the ability see the existing state of all the polls, and be able to dynamically adjust my vote based on the current voting state. If the platform doesn't do that - then any differential in information about how the votes might go creates an unfair voting dynamic - ie the voting outcome isn't just about how much you care..... If you map that back to say hackernews threads and voting - would people hold off voting, hoping somebody else spends their vote first - leading to less interaction. In the end - isn't the quality of votes simply a reflection of the quality of the electorate?