[First, a person knows when they submit an informed vote.]
I guess you have no understanding at all about the terms "intellectual honesty" and "self-skepticism."

[the system does function best with a higher percentage of INFORMED votes.]
Source?  We used to have voting just by propertied white men which was expanded by universal white male followed by universal male enfranchisement and finally universal adult enfranchisement.  US history seems to refute your assertion.

[Third, no vote is "a wash," and it is entirely possible for many uninformed votes to change an outcome.]
Possible?  Sure, with a small pool of voters and on the odd occasion.  But enough to function a voting system on it?  No.

[Finally, "good faith" does not change the outcome of the consequences of a poor choice.]
When did the value of voting ever predicate upon the results?  Oh, right.  Back in the days of voting only for propertied white men.