Keep in mind that the processes are set up for the entire network, and in some (many?) cases the nature by one of the largest networks - Stack Overflow - governs the implementation. There you typically deal with a sharks den of coding experts.
Voting still reigns supreme in terms of the Stack Exchange ranking mechanism. We tend to favour the one direction (...
First separate the question into two categories: Posts on Meta and posts on the Main site.
Voting on meta doesn't influence your reputation and therefore people might be more willing to downvote, especially questions. Regardless, voting on meta is considered different from voting on the main site since the posts deal with content on the main ...
Voting (specifically up/down-votes, not votes for closure or other review voting) has always been anonymous to avoid negative (or positive) consequences that result when people target specific users. This type of targeted voting is called serial voting (or voter fraud which stands opposite to regular, expected voting rationale) and Stack Exchange has ...
Draw this table BAD!
Draw this picture GREAT!
equation - BAD!
is the site rule.
We have tons of just-do-it-for-me picture questions which are largely upvoted, even if asked by old users.
Whereas just-do-it-for-me tables are usually downvoted. This one, for example, was sensibly dowvoted two times: Create table question.
The “all time” counter tells the total number of times you downvoted (without reverting later), but the 5 votes listed under the “Votes” tab only show votes on posts which still exist: the other 9 posts you downvoted were deleted after your vote.
Voting is the voter's prerogative, and therefore they are the person who needs to intervene if something was done by accident and any correction period has lapsed. The best way to handle it is to edit the post, then reverse your vote or vote alternatively. Yes, this is possible.
These types of voting corrections should be very few, and therefore shouldn't ...