Non-Anonymous voting will also lead to more thought-through voting and show a more realistic result.

What I disagree with, is that the only solution here would be to send sensitive/responsive people to seek for professional help whilst continuing to ignore the obvious problems. The usual storm of indignation which covers this whole topic is a clear sign that there are way too many introvert geeks on this site who are extremely touchy when it comes to unfairness and injustice. On the other hand, it's more than fairly obvious that there is a group of anti-social nerds who solve their problems by irritating the aforementioned ones. Catch 22, it is :)

And don't be obsessed by the fact that anonymous votes really works, because it don't. The voting system as it is now is NOT a thumb up or thumb down.

Really? Interesting, as I remember about a certain poll where the majority voted for removing the option for anonymous voting.

And that's a very good argument why should we dismiss it.

so, why do democratic states have secret voting on elections, if making the votes public could possibly lead to more thought through voting and thus a better result?

what people should simply realise is that the whole idea of "lets have votings so we can have nice objective stats on every release" is completely flawed. the ONLY way to fix the voting is to have many more actual voters. you cant compute any half meaningful value from 20 votes, thats just completely pointless - and thinking making votes public would change that fact is just utterly stupid be itself.

i am not obsessed by the fact that anonymous voting "works" (whatever that means). i am just pointing out that making them public would NOT fix the current situation with the voting system.

THIS is not politics.

OK. We agree in one thing: not enough voters.

BUT That is because the system doesn't work. It is fucked up. So users doesn't care of voting at all.

PROBLEM with anonymous voting:
Fake, double, triple, accounts.

Manupulating to get your group or whatever to look better.

Voting either 1 or 10, like Groepaz

Having some dissagreements and arguments, leads to downvoting

Agreed. But when will we have enough votes for a fair stats? In 5 years? Or 10, 20? In that case, we could face away from it for another decade till it gets better. All done.

Well if nothing else, public voting will at least make most of the downvoters to delete their shifty votes. Anyway, it won't make the system worse, that's for sure. But what we'd actually avoiding with it, is the negative social aspect it produces, which is seemingly none of your concern. What about less disagreements, uproars, confrontations, pointings, "backstabbing", etc. etc. You name it.