Good Manners In Political Ratings

I happen to like the new rating system. Although I recognize its possible misuse I think some of us don't get feedback when our posts aren't responded to. Perhaps not getting responded to is a sign that you have not written something thought-provoking or it could alternatively be a sign that you wrote something useful but which didn't need a response. I also see the use of this system being anonymous since some people may be turned off by a post but not want to involve themselves in a spat.

However, I think politics is often less fun when it's about identity or popularity. This is why I am unsure what kind of rating we are going to see for OMK and others posting views that are per se unpopular. Will his rating converge on negative one trillion? Or will the reaction be less visceral? If he makes a post and it does not contain any outright lies, he doesn't accuse anyone of having leprosy, or wanting to fornicate with Muslims, does this deserve a positive rating?

Anyway, I mean this mostly in jest, but I think we can use the system as an inducement to good behavior if we give good ratings even to those we disagree with if they make their argument decently or even effectively. What do you think?