They do, but to a lesser extent.
Anyway, I'm not going to go into it further. If people want to believe this at face value, that's fine. It's probably incorrect, but it's hardly the first time Humans have chosen that option.
I just hate explaining why I think a thing is true and, instead of an actual reply addressing that "I see what you mean, but what about..." or "Fair, but counterpoint...", and instead it's just some hyperbolic strawman.
EDIT:
I agree with this, and it's my point.
I have said this whole time I think the survey is useful despite this, have I not? I've even been one cross posting it to other threads with a similar topic to get more responses.
I also agree with the "why" of it. The problem is, you have to match the responses to the written answers at the bottom (not sure if it does this on the backend or not) to see what that is. For example, if a lot of 0s had as their long form answer something like "I loved old SMN and hate this one <insert negative adjectives like "braindead">", then we might conclude that it's vote bombing by people who want its average to look low in the hopes SMN gets changed. On the other hand, if it's people posting about specific things they dislike about it and why, that might be more useful. We need a way to parse out the people angry at losing old SMN from the people that legitimately dislike the mechanics, since those are two different arguments and different potential solutions. e.g. if new SMN had been an entirely new Job and old SMN existed, that hate wouldn't exist, thus it isn't "useful" in that sense other than "These people need/want a DoT Job". Which IS useful information, but doesn't tell us anything about whether new SMN is bad ON ITS OWN MERITS or not.
But as you say, most people don't rate things 0 or 10, much less that many 0s. For example, I dislike a lot of Jobs, but I still will rate them a 3 or so.