1) Broadcast that you find all labor extra unpleasant and all goods extra valuable, to encourage people to bid high

But if other people bid high, then you have to pay more. And they will know if you bid lower, because the auctions are public. How does this help you?

2) Bid artificially lower values when you know someone enjoys a labor / doesn't mind parting with a good and will bid accordingly.

I don't understand how this helps you either; if you bid lower and therefore win the auction, then you have to do the chore for less than you value it at. That's no fun.

The way our system works, it actually gives the lowest bidder, not their actual bid, but the second lowest bid minus 1; that way you don't have to do bidding wars, and can more or less just bid what you value it at. It does create the issue that you mention - bid sniping, if you know what the lowest bidder will bid you can bid just above it so they get as little as possible - but this is at the risk of having to actually do the chore for that little, because bids are binding.

I'd very much like to understand the issues you bring up, because if they are real problems, we might be able to take some stabs at solving them.

whenever there is real disagreement, you use money to effect an easy compromise.

This has become somewhat of a norm in our house. We can pass around chore points in exchange for rides to places and so forth; it's useful, because you can ask for favors without using up your social capital. (Just your chore points capital, which is easier to gain more of and more transparent.)