I'll preface by saying I've only been active on this site for a few weeks. Other than a solid trolling from one user, I've enjoyed it. Like most 'answerers' I get value from filling in the gaps in my knowledge, or relearning things, by answering questions.
In that context, my question - why does superuser, specifically, appear to have almost non existent up voting on answers? There are a certain number of Qs that get large #s of upvotes on both the Q and the As, with some correlation to quality and a higher correlation to the general appeal of the content (meaning the topic is understood by and applicable to a high % of users), but there are hundreds of Q and A(s) with solid, in scope content and accurate responses where the entire thread is 0'd, and the OP doesn't even acknowledge the answer. Or does, but doesn't upvote it.
I'm a newb, and what do I know, but it seems like an odd culture for this sort of platform. I'm curious if the # of upvotes is actually higher than the down votes.
The lack of confirmed answers leaves people searching the history in a bit of a spot as well - was it right? Wrong? Etc.
So downvote this and tell me why I'm stupid ;) Edit to clarify - I'm not terribly interested in karma or rep; beyond a 'thats nice' sort of perspective - but I think its a good community with which I share technical interests and I'm really just curious about this aspect of things. I've consumed content from this site and other related sites for years now (crap this broke, google --> superuser --> answer --> fix) and it's interesting having spent time answering questions for 'inconsiderate jerks', like myself, who just hit and run and can't spare a nod to help 'grade' the content.