Just to present another point that I just thought of: Imagine if we take the downvote ability away from everyone. I believe there is still an "implicit" downvo

Just to present another point that I just thought of: Imagine if we take the downvote ability away from everyone. I believe there is still an "implicit" downvote in the form of every other comment getting upvoted. Under the current system, upvoted posts will be pushed to the top and downvoted posts will be on the bottom. Would this not cause the same effect as previous? Being ignored several times because your opinion does not conform the social norm will cause you to self sensor (or leave HN), would it not? At the same time I think we recognize the value of upvotes, which in theory should allow for relevant and thoughtful content to be pushed to the top so more people can be exposed to it. Otherwise we'd have the traditional forums, which has widely variable SNR. I'm not sure how to reconcile these points: 1. The wish to filter for "good" post and filter out the "bad" posts. 2. The subjective definition of "good" or "bad". 3. "Bad" (opposite) opinions gets buried because of point 2. On the other hand I think education does work, as personally I refrain from downvoting when i disagree, only when it clearly does not add value (but even then, that is subjective). Although I'm not sure if this is obvious enough to HN users who first gained the ability to downvote.