Here's an example of what I'm asking about:
I just came across this comment by Geoffrey Miller from 9 hours ago:
Once the FTX debacle gets resolved, and the PR blowback dies down, it might be useful for EAs to try to nudge Bezos to broaden his cause areas -- on the principle that tackling climate change may be moderately important in scope and severity, but is far from neglected, and seems rather intractable politically.
It would be great to see some of the Amazon money going to higher-impact cause areas.
The comment is essentially a truism within EA, yet as of this moment it has 9 karma with 11 votes and only 2 agreement karma with 7 votes, meaning a nontrivial fraction of EA Forum users voting on it disagreed with it.
It's not very often that I come across posts/comments on the Forum where both (1) the karma/agreement voting behavior seems very off the mark from what it seems to me it should be, and (2) I further don't have a good explanation for why the current vote is what it is.
However, in the last few days since the FTX news broke I have noticed more than a few unexpected karma/agreement vote counts (though I didn't save any examples), hence why I'm asking this now.
Has anyone else noticed karma/agreement votes being off from what you'd expect recently too? In particular, have you seen more comments with karma and disagreement downvotes despite no obvious reason (or commented justification) for disagreement?
Or am I wrong in suspecting that voting patterns may have changed recently? (I'm only basing this suspicion based on a few surprising examples in the last few days.)
If it seems like voting behavior has changed/degraded, is it a very recent phenomena (since the FTX news broke?), or has this been a more gradual change that you've noticed for a while?