Honestly, more than 50% of the downvoted comments I see on HN do not deserve to be downvoted. Less than half of them are rule-breaking, rude, useless, etc. Fr

Honestly, more than 50% of the downvoted comments I see on HN do not deserve to be downvoted. Less than half of them are rule-breaking, rude, useless, etc. Frankly, downvoting here has become just as bad as on Reddit: it happens because people don't like the comment for any reason, including, e.g. that what they had for lunch is giving them indigestion at the moment they lay eyes on it (but mostly it's because they simply disagree, which is shameful). This particular comment is full of speculation, but it's not unreasonable speculation, and the linked article gives no details to contradict it. I wish we could have an interesting discussion about what might be, rather than mindlessly censor it by downvoting so that we can only have approved conversations. This just reinforces my conclusion that the only kind of voting should be upvoting. If a comment breaks a rule, flag it, otherwise leave it alone, and concentrate on upvoting good comments. This shaming-by-graying is becoming very tiresome. It's ridiculous that it only takes a few random downvoters to turn a comment gray, because it's not an indication of what the community as a whole thinks, only those who happened to downvote it (after which the likelihood of it being upvoted by people who do like it diminishes, because it being downvoted decreases the likelihood of anyone seeing it). TLDR: Voting on HN is badly broken. It only takes a few selfish, childish people to kill comments and prevent the community from even having a chance to correct the downvotes.