zlacker

What makes you think karma is anything other than a popularity contest rather than the best argument? I've had comments downvoted to negative land without anyone commenting on my comment. If someone can't be bothered to state what they find wrong with a comment, then they shouldn't downvote. Such downvotes are basically trying to silence the speaker instead of addressing what they are saying.

>>2718i3+(OP)
I don't think that.

>>dang+h1
You said "We want the best comments and the best arguments to 'win', not skew things in insiders' favor." But only those that get to a certain threshold apparently.

>>2718i3+(OP)
I don't know about your comments, but if I see one which is easy to debunk by looking it up then I just downvote. There's no reason to be less lazy than the original poster just to prove them wrong.

>>2718i3+b2
"We want" means it's a goal to aspire to, not that it's already the case.

Not sure what you mean about thresholds.

>>hiq+w3
> one which is easy to debunk

Yes, and I also do it, but very rarely and as an exception (and I am strongly in the position of "sniping weakens the system").

The issue is that it is possible that the censor may have misunderstood and missed something that was not clearly expressed.

>>2718i3+b2
Passing a threshold doesn't do anything for your own comments.

>>2718i3+(OP)
Just a guess - you may be downvoted not for exactly what you are saying, but how you are saying it. You may have valid criticism, but being rude is not met with welcome on HN (for good reasons).

>>mdp202+R6
> something that was not clearly expressed

I'd argue that in this case it's also in the interest of the community to downvote, since the comment adds more noise than it contributes to the discussion. In the end it's a ranking; if other comments are better worded and clearer, everything else being equal, they deserve to be higher up.