zlacker

>>pg+(OP)
Vote down for any user, because it more useful to vote down, and for ranking it does not matter how a link count is reached, by voting down or up.

>>nirs+Fib
Not sure I've parsed your grammar correctly, but rewarding the community for participation by letting them downvote only when they reach 20 karma is a good thing.

Also, downvoting past 1 karma in general is a bad thing. It adds bias to the comment for future readers.

It really seems like downvoting in its current form is fine, and if any changes need to be made then capping downvoting at 1 karma might be a good idea.

>>palish+vkb
You mean down-voting past 1 points? Why it add bias for future readers?

I also don't see why you need to reward the community. The right to down vote is not different from the right to up vote, and any user should have it. Up vote is simply "I want more of this", and down vote "I want less of this".

The same machinery used for up-votes of bad links can be applied to down-votes of good links, so you can protect the site from general stupidity.