I agree it's our duty to vote, but if we can't be informed voters, it's probably our best alternate duty to not vote. Truth is, I'd rather have someone like Fohat, whose vote has probably canceled out every one I've made in the last 20 years, vote instead of an ill informed voter who accidentally presses the same buttons as I do.
That's illogical.. How and why something happens is disconnected from your logical DESIRED outcome..
My greater, "logical desired outcome" is for democracy to work.
I think that overall our system was pretty well thought out. A system which respects the points of views of all of its constituents, while still having safeguards to prevent abuses by factions. As unlikely as it may seem to most of us, other people may have different but valid perspectives which should be, at least, considered. Therefore, in general, a well developed argument, even if it's wrong, is more important to the system than a volume of input with no substance; the latter simply clouding the results.
Being only minimally utilitarian in my philosophy of right and wrong, I don't generally agree with the Machiavellian concept that the ends justify the means. I think we should trust the system and try to work within it, accept it, and fight it only as a last resort. That includes voter fraud, coercion as well as suppression, and equally important—accepting the results.