This question already has an answer here:
Edit: The question here isn't attempting to determine when a democratic vote or process is necessary or correct. Here it is trying to point to indicators that a voter might notice that would cause them to not want to participate in the existing democratic vote they are eligible for (not abstain). Note, the other question is pertaining to when to use a democratic vote as opposed to other systems. This question asks when is a democratic vote detrimental to the system itself, or how it can be detrimental.
Based on some of the comments and answers from this question.
Credit to this comment:
In rigged democratic systems voting is helpless. It only legitimise the system. Rather, do not vote. – luchonacho
Please do not challenge the claims made by the comment directly, the comment is the inspiration for this question.
We know that in functioning democracies it is typically a good thing to vote on everything there is a vote for. However, the world contains a myriad of governments at various states of functionality.
Given the premise is correct, that it can be bad for a democracy to have people voting, what conditions or situations would help identify when it is better to keep silent?
Seeing that the inspirational comment mentions a rigged system, the answer should address indicators to look for that establish the system is actually rigged (with reasonable understanding these indicators are not proof and may be controversial).
Please note: This question is not seeking answers on what to do instead of voting or election tactics. I am looking specifically at conditions, situations, or scenarios when participating in the voting process is counter-productive to sustaining the democracy and why it is bad to cast that vote.
So, the question is:
At what point would it be bad for democracy to vote and why/how is it bad after that point?
Or, possibly to rephrase it again; when is it damaging to democracy to vote in a democracy?
Suggestions for improving the question are welcome.