Experts only rule in the world of governments. Here in the wild west, experts are rare, most people are generalists.
Not only that, there's more people who think they are experts than there actually is experts. So the argument still diminishes in validity over time.
ok. But I don't see how that's relevant. The fact that generalists exist doesn't justify silencing the experts' votes.
The comment that I responded to made a blanket statement that self-votes are always spam. I provided counterexamples demonstrating that self-votes are not always spam, and in fact, they often convey more information than votes cast by others.
This is basic logic. If a counterexample exists, then "always" is shown false. qed
Your point is valid, however, even 'experts' cannot be considered as such without their peers. Declaring something doesn't make it so. Same applies to voting.