Why was this voted down? cheald presents a reasonable argument. Certainly no ad-hominem attacks. Thimothy then presents a rebuttal with reasonable counter-claim

Why was this voted down? cheald presents a reasonable argument. Certainly no ad-hominem attacks. Thimothy then presents a rebuttal with reasonable counter-claims. I find both points of view interesting and contributing to the discussion. This is a valid dialectic between two parties. I thought HN did not downvote arguments merely because we disagreed with them, which is one of the reasons it has appeal to me.