Well, I think I agree with you on a couple of points. I do think that people give lurve based on whether they agree with the point of view. I think this is only natural. It is hard to see the value of a post that says something you think is wrong. Clearly that person is not thinking very well. So, to that extent, lurve on a question can be a popularity contest for that point of view.
Some people are willing to give lurve for opinions they do not agree with because the opinion is given in a well-written or well-argued way. This is difficult to do, because it is hard to separate the quality of the argument from the quality of the opinion. Some people seem to be able to do it better than others. I’m not so good at that.
I know that if I am going to give an unpopular or unconventional point of view, I had better get my ducks lined up in a row (get my arguments in shape). I usually try to tell a story about my experience when I’m doing that because people seem to respond to stories better than arguments.
Probably like and dislike enters into it. If you like the person you might be more inclined to lurve them than if you dislike them, even if you think it is a good comment.
I don’t think it is as much seniority as reputation that affects how people treat you. I think that if people have doubts about an answer, they will give it a second look if it comes from someone they respect. Otherwise, they will be more likely to pass on to the next answer.
I think this is natural human behavior. We are more comfortable with what and who we know. We want to know what our friends have to say. People we don’t know—well, they have a barrier to overcome because they are not as well known. A lot of people are here to get to know people. They know that new people often don’t stick around. So it’s not worth as much time reading them. Once a person has proved they are serious about the place, then they start getting more attention, assuming people like what they have to say.