I think it would make sense if you weakly vote on them, by spending relatively few points of your quadratic budget on them. Voting very strongly on them feels wrong to me. Basically, vote in strength proportional to your confidence times the goodness/badness of your assessment of the post, would be my guess.
I also note that I think there’s signal in your decision to only skim a post, as opposed to reading it, but as noted in habryka’s response, it’s probably a weak signal.
Is it pro-social or anti-social to vote on posts I have skimmed but not read?
I think it would make sense if you weakly vote on them, by spending relatively few points of your quadratic budget on them. Voting very strongly on them feels wrong to me. Basically, vote in strength proportional to your confidence times the goodness/badness of your assessment of the post, would be my guess.
+1 I have voted on a number of posts that I’ve mostly skimmed, but not voted with much weight.
(Quadratic voting makes the first few votes just very cheap, which was one part of my reasoning.)
I also note that I think there’s signal in your decision to only skim a post, as opposed to reading it, but as noted in habryka’s response, it’s probably a weak signal.
I think it’s a particularly weak signal when you’re trying to evaluate 75 posts at once.