4 ms·
> In the meantime, we will simply have to stop assuming that downvoted comments are actually, you know, bad. I don't think this is true. Given that downvoted
by krat0sprakhar 12y ago
> In the meantime, we will simply have to stop assuming that downvoted comments are actually, you know, bad.
I don't think this is true. Given that downvoted comments become faded, I have a strong reason to believe that the intent is to hide them because they are actually bad
- danielweber 12y agoThe irony of your comment being faded should not be lost.
- vonmoltke 12y agoYes, I think that was the actual intent of the system. However, bad != disagreeing with the majority. If the up/down vote functionality is to be used to express agreement or disagreement, which is a change from the original philosophy, then the system should change accordingly. angersock's point is that, as it stands now, a faded-out comment may simply be expressing a good but unpopular opinion.
- krapp 12y agoYou're using circular reasoning - that the comments are faded because they're bad, and the evidence they're bad is that they're faded. But, people downvote comments for any number of reasons, and even doing so for mere disagreement is within the acceptable guidelines - and of course for everything, despite the lack of clear context, the effect remains the same.
- vacri 12y agoIt only takes a single person disagreeing with you to fade your comment.
- readerrrr 12y agoThat is also a problem. One downvote later and the comment is immediately biased toward future readers.