Jakob Nielsen helped to popularize the myth that web users don't scroll down. It led to an era of website design that crammed as much onto one page, leading to busy, crowded homepages. It wasn't until later that early adopters of CSS made websites simple again, in part to avoid compatibility issues with Internet Explorer.
The more motivated you are to vote, the more likely you are to vote it a five. A mediocre video is characterized by a lack of votes, not a preponderance of three-star votes.
Back when Youtube rounded the average vote result down to the nearest star, I joked that Youtube videos really only had three ratings:
Five star: New video (eventually it will accrue a vote of other than 'five' and drop to four stars)
Four star: Top notch (mainly fives, a few troll one-star votes)
Three star: Disgusting trash (at least many one-votes as fives)
You don't see anything less than three-star since it will have been deleted by the time you get there.
This happened before, when Google Adsense paid $1 for anyone who installed Firefox with Google Toolbar via an affiliate link. A clever chap ran ads linking to a download page with his affiliate link.
It's a serious usability fault, not a clever hack. This test paper fails to comply with the user's expectations, like a webpage that breaks the Back button.
"I hope I am not the first person to tell you this, but nobody reads design documents. In fact, when working at larger studios, I made a habit of inserting the line “I will pay $5 to anyone who reads this sentence” into the center of any document over 50 pages. In 10 years of development nobody ever asked for their money."