OK Jay, I'll join you in some rampant speculation. I haven't heard anything about the conscious attempt to encourage community scoring that Gordon refers to, but he may well have probed this area more deeply than I have. The notion of deliberately shooting for a gobble hole brings along another whole model of player motives.
Snow Derby was the first pinball I operated in revenue service (at a "street location" BTW). My impression at the time was that the primary cause of excitement was the scoring boost after draining. This effect also continued with the long-flipper games and their 10x inflated scores. For example, you drain on the last (5th) ball on Jack in the Box at 69,210 and then your end-of-ball bonus (non-ladder in this game) gets you past the 77,000 replay threshold. So you managed to pull out a win after draining the last ball. I don't recall any talk, whether directly from players or indirectly via other ops or distrib sales reps, about players wanting to earn their own scores. Keep in mind that the carry-over features could often be seen as one player stealing the work of another. In Fireball for example, Player 1 can do all the work of trapping 2 balls, then drain before starting multi-ball. Then Player 2 comes along and easily starts multi-ball without doing all the work of setting it up.
For Snow Queen/Derby, we must also bear in mind that it has very low scoring on the playfield; perhaps the smallest span of values (50, literally) of any pinball game in which the scoring system supports 4 significant figures. Further, it has playfield devices that light (excuse me, "lite") for higher value based on the ball-in-play rather than the player hitting at target to lite it. We know* that Gottlieb had a deliberate design guideline, for multi-player games only, of lighting up devices without a skill component. By contrast, single-player games would allow skill-based enhancement of the values of some devices, because these games with ball-to-ball feature build-up were the real skill showcases. The multi-player games were viewed as being more sociable. (*Source: answers to my question about this topic by Alvin Gottlieb and Wayne Neyens at Pinball Expo a couple years ago.)
The end-of-ball bonus in Snow Queen/Derby definitely impacted Krynski and Neyens through the feedback loop of higher revenues. I don't think they had a theology of community scoring, just sociability as described above. (It's still "more fun to compete" rather than "more fun to cooperate" and if cooperating were in the theology, why not just have a party of five play one ball each on a single-player game?) We're getting into territory where the earning of extra balls (same player shoots again) would also need to be factored in. We moved from the "boring" situation where that 100 point pop bumper will lite automatically on the 5th ball (e.g., Airport) for every player to an exciting situation where a player can hit enough targets in a single ball to earn an extra ball (e.g., Vulcan/Fire Queen).
To tie in some earlier posts in this thread: certainly Target Alpha/Solar City suffers the "boring" label relative to the single-player variant, El Dorado. If you've played both, you're probably going to prefer the game where you have multiple balls to get all 15 targets and get big payoffs for doing so. If you had never seen El Dorado (or its AAB siblings), you might think Target Alpha is sufficiently exciting.
For the record, I operated all the games I have mentioned in this thread so far. I have no recollection of any group of players deliberately playing in multi-player mode for purposes of community scoring.