I fully agree with the double vote concept. Why limit it? After all an answer can be esteemed ten times more than another, why not be allowed to express that?

The change to the code to implement that should be small except for one factor: at what point do you show the rep?

• After the first vote is cast?
• Never?
• After the last vote is cast?

"After the first vote" engenders the same behaviour modification that is the reason rep is suppressed until you have voted now (whatever that effect is perceived to be).

"Never" defeates the purpose of rep almost entirely - no-one but the author gets any feedback on the quality of the node.

"After the last vote" is definitely the best option. "Huh" you say? "How does the work" you say? Easy, we provide a "show me the rep" button. After a vote is cast for "show me the rep" you don't get to vote on the node any more, but you can see the node's reputation. Oh, "Show me the rep" costs a vote too :). So if you are not interested in the rep of a node, but just want to encourage the author you don't have to "waste" a vote to find out. On the other hand, if you are ambivelent about the node, but want to find out what others thought of it, you can spend a vote to find out. Oh, XP rewards apply for voting as they do now - at least in principle you are learning about what constitutes a well regarded node when you spend your "show me the rep" vote.

So the new scheame would have three radio buttons (++, --, show rep) and a text entry field for the number of votes to be cast.