I think it's actually an effect of people not posting great, defining questions. Most questions are easy to decide which side of the line they belong on.
I've seen many questions with a few opposers in the face of many acceptors, and the comment stream is lively enough that you see people are thinking critically about their choices.
I don't think that it's bad enough that it requires hiding the votes - or at least you haven't convinced me that it is that bad.
I've been posting many of my own questions without voting on them to see which way they go, and have been surprised sometimes. The reality is that what I think should be so, is not always the way the community will go.
Either way, it's subjective and I don't know that there's a good way to determine how bad a problem it is.
Even if it was bad, there isn't a good technical solution - for instance if you have all the votes hidden you have no way of knowing what direction the site is going in until you vote for every sinlge question. Some questions are meh and shouldn't be voted on, though, so how do you vote "meh" so you can see if the community agrees with you?
If a "meh" vote is implemented won't we still be incurring a LOT more work by each individual to see how a proposal is going, especially with the limit of 100 votes a day (or whatever it is now)?
Finally, the site is new, and people are still getting used to it, limits, encouragements, discouragements, etc are still being twiddled, etc. It'll be awhile before I think we can say we've reached a stable point where we could even measure such an effect.
- I don't think it's a big problem
- If it is, there's no good technical solution (that anyone has proposed yet)
- The site is still too new to really measure it appropriately