An important principle of Interactive Democracy is that people should only vote if they have a strong opinion. This may seem like a strange principle for a system that encourages people to become involved in politics, especially when considered in light of the arguments for voting to be made compulsory in general elections, as is the case in Australia and Belgium among many other countries. Put simply, if you don't have an opinion why vote?
By not voting more influence is conferred to those who do hold an opinion, perhaps because the issues impact them directly or they have studied the issues closely. This amplifies the effectiveness of the system.
But what of careless votes, cast for the hell of it? These by their very nature are likely to be randomly scattered on each side of the argument and will cancel each other out. They won't be a problem if there is a clear majority.