This question already has an answer here:
On Security Stack Exchange, voting is heavily influenced by hot network questions. As a recent example, one of my answers which I consider to be mediocre at best is currently on +82. Contrast this to another user's answer which is much better, but currently on +3. I expect this applies to other sites, although I don't have personal experience.
I can see why this happens - hot network questions are viewed largely by people who are not specialists in security, so simple answers are well received. I think hot network questions are a good thing - I've enjoyed dipping into unfamiliar groups like Aviation and Physics.
However, I think these voting patterns create undesirable incentives. There is no reputation incentive to write detailed technical answer - they don't get attention. Instead this encourages "rep whoring" - writing simple answers that appeal to people outside the speciality.
I've thought about this a bit and I'd like to suggest a solution: Once a question or answer goes above +10, if there are further votes from people outside the community, those votes only provide +1 reputation. By "outside the community" I mean people who would not be able to answer a protected question.
I realise this is quite a major change to how voting works, but I think the community should seriously consider it. The rep cap provides a similar effect, but I think it works better on Stack Overflow. The effect is slightly different for non-SO sites, and I think distinguishing between community members and non-members will work better.
Alternative solution from Rathony: make the association bonus not count towards the upvoting privilege.