My answer to your question is yes. I have voted NO or ABSTAIN on 27 out of my 71 votes. I would not have voted differently if the money were refunded. I would still vote NO or ABSTAIN knowing that it will cost me money. I feel that in the long run, trying to maintain a level of quality of the assets on the exchange is worth more than the listing fee.
That was my point in another post; if voters are inherently good and decent, they will vote reasonably fast and they will do so knowing that long-term, their investments are better off. However, for someone 'investing' for profit, there's no incentive the way the system is designed now. Voters are paid when the listing is put up, regardless of whether they vote or not.
I suggested elsewhere that there should be a board of a few people that were trusted by the community to provide reasonable evaluations. If such a board was established, that board could be compensated from the paid listing fees directly in return for casting votes within a certain time.
By the way, a person with 10 shares gets 0.1% of the listing fee, or about $0.50. I don't think the fee has much of an influence, especially considering that the person has at least $6000 invested in the exchange.
True, but we also don't know how many shares those voters have; they could easily have ten times that much each, which would give them a whooping $5 on a $12K investment :-P
.b