You've made good points why transparency wouldn't be good. And unfortunately, like any sort of voting system will have its flaws. However, I think the abuses o

You've made good points why transparency wouldn't be good. And unfortunately, like any sort of voting system will have its flaws. However, I think the abuses of everything being opaque is much more deleterious. In the case of HN, speaking rights are directly linked to groupthink. If you're highly +1'ed, you get to speak more. If you're -1'ed, you speak less (rate limited). But yet, +1 als means "agree" or groupthink. -1 is reserved for trolls and flamewar starters. But yet, it's also used as a "I don't like you", "You're wrong", "Disagree", "Not popular"... Groupthink. Sure, you can have strong content converse to the article.. at -4. Transparency allows us to see these groups in action, and shines a light on the whole system. Sure, some bad actors can brigade specific users - but I see that as the exception and not the norm.