Based on what I saw when I joined Gotham vs. the world, the vote chess games with huge participation are a mix of unserious players (a minority who vote to resign on move 2, etc.) and people who post "we agreed on the Discord server to play move X”. I didn’t like having to create a Discord account to participate (so I did not), and had the sense that the game was between Levy and Dane Matsson, who had been appointed coach of the world team.
All of your points are good, I have no disagreements, but I’m guessing vote chess is not really for serious chess.
Maybe you should start a club for serious 3-day vote chess.
I have over the years joined quite a few Clubs for various reasons. Many of them, obviously, hope you will play for them in various Competitions. So, from time to time I have played in one or more of (1) Daily (2) Live or (3) Vote.
But, here I will talk only of (3).
Up until recently, my experience has been that 3 day voting was the overwhelming favorite.
But lately, 1 day and 2 day have started to be quite common.
All well and good if they are only for not really serious Chess, but they do not give what 3 day has, namely the chance to have a serious discussion over moves.
I have found that this lack of discussion is not really a good thing.
I am of average ability so, in 3 day games, sometimes there are much better players in the team, and I am only too happy to see what their contributions are to help me decide what move to vote for.
If, on the occasional game, where I find other players are not a lot better than me, I will have a say to try and put forward a case for some move or other, or a couple of reasonable alternatives,
If there are few players in a 2 or 1 day game, there is a danger, as I have found, of the team timing out because no-one votes.
Equally bad is that no-one discusses, bur merely votes on their idea, and a lottery decides the move made.
I invite discussion to see whether others among my readers have any thing to say, either in agreement or otherwise.