I kind of agree with the idea of being able to draw attention to the nodes that seem to generate the most "controversy", in the sense of attracting relatively higher numbers of both up- and down-votes. I'm not sure how many nodes would score highly on this sort of metric -- partly because PM has never shown us the numbers of up- and down-votes separately, only the resulting node-rep.

Obviously, Best Nodes and Worst Nodes focus attention on nodes that have already attracted attention -- but only if the nodes have evoked a consistently positive or negative response.

Nodes that get a lot of conflicting votes have also attracted attention, and it would seem natural to have a page that could focus more attention on them, despite the fact that their node-rep is close to zero.

As for the code you presented, I don't get what you're trying to provide there. What's the point of printing out 10,200 lines (101**2-1), and what's the meaning or intended use of the first value on each line?

I actually don't know whether the PM database keeps track of up- and down-votes separately; or whether it keeps track of total count of votes cast along with current node-rep, which amounts to the same thing. If it does neither of those things (i.e. it tracks only current node-rep, which is just incremented or decremented as votes are cast), then the information needed for a "Conflicted Nodes" page is simply not available.

But if two values are being tracked, then ranking nodes top-down by "$total_votes - $node_rep" "$total_votes - abs( $node_rep )" would do the right thing.