Counterpoint: comments that are counterfactual or fallacious deserve to be downvoted. "Not adding value to the discussion" is far too broad, since it includes m

Counterpoint: comments that are counterfactual or fallacious deserve to be downvoted. "Not adding value to the discussion" is far too broad, since it includes many other things that can be extremely subjective, so I think it's not useful as a guideline. > penalize downvotes that are on comments which also have several upvotes Seems like a version of automatic meta-moderation. I'm not strictly against the idea of modifying someone's "voting power" based on past voting behavior - frequent vs. infrequent, positive vs. negative, conformist (for lack of a better term) or contrary. However, such systems have to contend with the issue of reinforcing groupthink rather than actual quality, and the last thing HN needs is more groupthink. Also, any implementation is likely to involve the manipulation of values that aren't small integers, and apparently that's Too Hard.