I am inordinately and completely inappropriately proud of the fact that I was ranked number 3 overall in the metasurvey, though I'm not sure I'd want to do a rematch with Dave.

But I wonder what it indicates about someone that they're ranked well.  In Dave's case, I suspect it's largely attunement to the Zeitgeist and lots of experience with informal polling.  But I spend half my time reading psychology and the weirder corners of the history of philosophy, so I doubt my Zeitgeist-attunement is above average for a faculty member at at PhD-granting institution.  My guess -- this could checked -- is that most people oversteered, while I played it flatter except in obvious cases like atheism-theism, including always setting aside a healthy chunk for "other".