This is because many people here still vote by agreement, rather than for comments that are interesting, insightful, contradictory, terse, and so on. This happe

This is because many people here still vote by agreement, rather than for comments that are interesting, insightful, contradictory, terse, and so on. This happens on a much larger scale with lower-rated comments. I once saw the word "no" with a score of 50~, which made up for the contributor's running streak of -5~. It wasn't that their contribution quality became better, it was that their comment hit that major "upvote when you agree" fault in our system. It reduces our quality. Seeing even a poorly-composed brute force attack on the ideas in the article is what I come to the comments for, because even reckless disagreement is often a gold mine of those little bits of information that you didn't take into consideration, but should have. (I've said all this before, and it should be repeated.) Vote for what you think others should see, not for what you agree with.