I don't think that I can describe my voting by anything so structured. If I find something interesting, educational, profound, insightful, I'll probably vote it up.

Anyone who attempts to convey knowledge -- not just giving an answer, but explaining why they would use their specific method over some other method, and whatever assumptions they may have made about the problem. I prefer responses that give people information so that they can better research and solve their problems on their own, without needing to ask others similar questions again in the future.

I don't vote down that often for answers. I'm more likely to vote down questions -- for the immoral questions, or the person who's grubbing for homework answers, or asking the same question over and over again, but nor for people giving answers. For the questions, I'd rather tell people if I think there's something wrong, so that potentially, they can learn and improve -- voting them down doesn't help them. (so I guess -- I just vote something down when I think they're beyond help) I'd rather not mark down a person for being wrong, and give corrections if I think there's a chance for people to improve.

... and for some reason, I seem to find that significant number of my votes go to brian_d_foy. It's not an intentional thing, I just notice when I scroll back up to vote on an article, a large number of them seem to be written by him.

ps. I voted the parent node down. It just seemed to be XP grubbing to me.