"But what about you". No, I don't. I'm arguing that downvoting is a lazy way to discuss. It's anonymous, drive-by and a completely useless way to speak your mi

"But what about you". No, I don't. I'm arguing that downvoting is a lazy way to discuss. It's anonymous, drive-by and a completely useless way to speak your mind. I'm arguing that the option to downvote discourages discussion. They don't have to engage at all if the quality was so low. What about the comment was low quality? How can it be improved? Are the claims incorrect? Or was someone just offended? All that information is lost with the downvote and there's no way to find out. If they know so much better why don't they use that knowledge and educate? What is low quality is subjective, I don't think the comment was low quality, but the downvote brigade managed to hide it. It's a shame because this could've been an interesting thread. Ironic given the context don't you think?