3 ms·
> blanket regulatory attitude across the IT spectrum That's jumping to conclusions. I didn't elaborate at all what kind of regulation I support or how granular
by dmos62 8y ago
> blanket regulatory attitude across the IT spectrum
That's jumping to conclusions. I didn't elaborate at all what kind of regulation I support or how granular. I now feel that my comment wasn't up to the standard, because it has a bad mix of off-topic and terse "snarkiness".
As to the usage of downvotes, of course you can use it however you like, just like you can dismiss anyone you like whenever. I'm referring to a common _regulation_ in communities, that a comment shouldn't be dismissed if you don't like it, but only if it has a negative effect on the discussion.
What do you hope to achieve by downvoting those you disagree with? Force their opinions to the bottom of the discussion stack? I.e. silence them? That's what you're effectively doing, and it's not conducive to a healthy community.
- plainOldText 8y agoI rarely downvote those I disagree with. And when I do, my goal is to have them reconsider and question their position and not at all to silence them. I fail to see how I jumped to conclusions. You clearly stated that vis-a-vis regulation: > I'm a big proponent. Everything from closed-source to monopolies and ads. If this is not an extreme pro-regulation attitude then I don't know what is. And just to be clear, comments are clearly superior to downvotes, though we'd hardly get any work done had we written replies to all comments we disagree with; thus, occasionally replying via downvotes.