5 ms·
> half the comments of this page are greyed out Deservedly so. Most (if not all) of those comments are ad hominems and doesn't address the proposed system in t
by calcifer 6y ago
> half the comments of this page are greyed out
Deservedly so. Most (if not all) of those comments are ad hominems and doesn't address the proposed system in the article at all. In fact, there is no evidence those commentors have even read the article. One of them actually complains about how photogenic he is!
- mmm_grayons 6y agoNot really. Up until this morning, my comment had a positive number of votes; it is now very gray. It was not an ad hominem attack. It was a critique of the author's value more than his proposed policies, but I certainly read the article.
- calcifer 6y agoI wasn't really talking about your comment, which is probably the only non-ad hominem gray comment so far. As for why you might be getting downvotes, I'd guess that "any system that limits how rich I can be is bad" is very disagreeable for most people and the voting reflects that.
- mmm_grayons 6y agoWell, I didn't say that explicitly, but I'd definitely agree with that. I'm definitely okay if removing corruption inherently limits the amount of wealth one can acquire, but a system that explicitly does that is antithetical to the value of non-aggression and is a tremendous violation of property rights. Nevertheless, my objection was to the use of "voting as disagreement". That's what comments are for.
- calcifer 6y ago> Nevertheless, my objection was to the use of "voting as disagreement". Oh, well that's a long lost fight. No matter how platform holders define a downvote, it has always meant I don't like this and there is too much inertia to change it.