No I don't feel that strongly one way or the other. But I'd prefer constructive criticism for my hubs. However, if the hub score changes drastically, I investigate. Try to get an idea on what about the hub is creating regular large shifts in voting.
I rarely vote on a hub. I prefer to comment. I don't factor in poor spelling, grammar, or structure when I vote. This is something that can be changed, if pointed out and given direction to the hub writer. It's easy to fix, and you help a hubber out a great deal by pointing it out. Instead of factoring it in a vote. I personally, edit my own hubs time to time. Regardless if someone has told me there's a problem or not. So I imagine, there are other hubbers who are the same. Which is another reason I don't factor that stuff in my votes.
I generally go easy. It's more likely I'll vote up. I'll vote down, if I feel a topic is poorly researched in the case of non-fiction. Also if it reads more like spam.
For fiction, I'll vote down if it has a flimsy plot, premise, goes on longer then it needs to, or has holes. For fictional blog posts, articles, interviews, and ads I look at differently. Considering it as experimental works of fiction. In that case, my vote is based solely on entertainment value according to personal opinion.