I didn't read every word of the article but I skimmed it.
http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2012/10/philosophers-eating-ethics.html seems to be the post that had the poll.
The poll had exactly one question. The LessWrong survey had 106. If Leiter would have made a survey with multiple questions, one of those questions would be the amount of academic philosophy education that the respondend got.
We could focus on those people to answer the question whether academic philosophers have different views on being vegan than the general population.
A survey with a lot of questions is also less likely to be the target of meatpuppet voting.
Information that surprises you is interesting as it exposes where you have been miscalibrated, and allows you to correct for that.
I suspect the users of LessWrong have fairly similar beliefs, so it is probable that information that has surprised you would surprise others here, so it would be useful for them if you shared them.
Example: In a discussion with a friend recently I realised I had massively miscalibrated on the percentage of the UK population who shared my beliefs on certain subjects, in general the population was far more conservative than I had expected.
In retrospect I was assuming my own personal experience was more representative than it was, even when attempting to correct for that.