As a conversation starter for a discussion, your post was good. Personally I would be slightly (but not very) interested in a psychologist's view on how a person perceives online communities (especially when they have facilities like voting).

I do get the impression that some members of PerlMonks see it as being a Perl Community, and others see it as a Perl Community. Perhaps posts that are not directly related to Perl (or not perceived as such) which tackle moral points are always going to get a huge variety of strong opinions - one way or another.

Some members possibly see the voting system as a very useful tool, and others see it as being (very) secondary to learning about Perl. Those that do use the voting system vigorously have only -- and ++ to convey their opinion.
With code it is somewhat simple. But with posts that are of a more moral focus, how many people ++ a node to say it was well posted, expressed the poster's view well ... and then follow it up with a disagreement?

--
Graq