The reward given for a review is not in their control, so it's not really fair to criticise them for that. Also, what do you mean by soft-factors? I'm assuming you are talking about the comments and commit messages questions? If so, then they already have a really low weight, and the most emphasis is put on the amount of work, significance / impact of the update on the project and the quality of the code.

As for the quality of the review comment. We used to justify every single decision we made, e.g. about the quality of the code and give examples on how it could be improved, but some people got really offended by this and complained. Because of this we have been trying to find a middle ground, which we are obviously still searching for as you can see. While I agree that @codingdefined could've maybe added a bit more justification for the given score, the contributor could've also simply asked him to expand on it. Instead we got this shit storm, which really doesn't benefit anyone to be honest.