Social voting is absolutely broken.
As you, and countless others, I'm sure, have observed: the "vote" means precisely bupkis.
The problem with online “voting” (or “liking”, or “plussing”, etc) is that it is a dimensionless data point.
Does getting 300 “likes” on a post make it “good”? Does it reflect on its quality in any way? How about getting nearly 400 upvotes (and only a handful of downvotes) on a question about MySQL (along with 100+ “favorites”) mean the question is good? Does it show something is popular? Are people clicking the vote mechanism out of peer pressure, because they actually agree, or because they think it needs more visibility? Or something else entirely?
What do you think a "vote" means? Was it "good"? Did it "help"? Was it "funny"? Do you just like the user who posted it?
Why do you even think you need any form of "voting"? (Outside of peer pressure, because "everyone else does it"?)
If you really want to obtain something that even resembles value for a vote, you need to include a lot more data:
And the total of each type of click should be shown – show me 10,000 people disagreed with what I said, 15,000 agreed; 20,000 upvoted, and 30,000 downvoted; 12,000 reshared it (with, or without, comment).
Because "voting" - especially so-called "sockpuppeting" or "revenge voting" has some nasty side-effects:
Using voting as a means of hiding things (and trying to prevent others from seeing them) can be somewhat akin to online bullying – revenge voting has its problems; as does blindly upvoting anything a particular person says/does. Which is why assigning (and then displaying) dimensionless data anything more than a count is dangerous.
Unless you have an unusually strong need to have something that resembles a "vote" (or like, or +1, or ♥️, etc), DON'T even put it in!