Carl, this morning I queued up blocking people from voting on their own posts. That should be live in a few days.
Actually, we are emulating StackOverflow's style and approach to voting. The goal is to make it simpler for people to provide feedback and to gather stats on what posters get the strongest and weakest reputations.
It's literally only been two days so I think it's far too short a test period to make a final decision.
I disagree... I hate "me too" posts, voting gives readers a way to express agreement or disagree with a thought/idea/suggestion. In many cases there is nothing additional to add, and scrolling through lots of LOL's and YEAH's isn't a very high quality experience.
It's helpful to encourage people who downvote a post (as I did to yours) to explain WHY they downvoted it. But upvotes really need to explanation (just MHO).
One thing I would suggest is not displaying "points" anywhere for a user though. We don't need a ranking system of who generated the most agreeable posts, and shouldn't encourage people to post things soley for the point of racking up Internet Posts. Doesn't look like that has happened anyway, but mentioning it just in case.
Only six negative votes? Obviously, I haven't tried hard enough.