Besides, someone changing the points of an old comment no one may ever read again from 8 to 7 is hardly improving the quality of discourse.
I disagree. The idea is that people will read the old comments again, and the score of comments gives an impression to a random passerby what the community is about.
Sure, so long as it doesn’t give the impression that that is what the community was about at that time. This community is a moving target, and ideas and opinions change. If we decide to update old comments with new votes, do we risk losing something of archival interest? If we vote up a comment that says ‘A is B’, and a year later vote up a comment that says ‘A is not B’, going back and voting down the ‘A is B’ comment gives the false impression that this community is remarkably consistent. I think I’m blowing this out of proportion, though.
I disagree. The idea is that people will read the old comments again, and the score of comments gives an impression to a random passerby what the community is about.
Of note, I certainly read old comments and vote on them all the time and consider all posts open discussion.
Sure, so long as it doesn’t give the impression that that is what the community was about at that time. This community is a moving target, and ideas and opinions change. If we decide to update old comments with new votes, do we risk losing something of archival interest? If we vote up a comment that says ‘A is B’, and a year later vote up a comment that says ‘A is not B’, going back and voting down the ‘A is B’ comment gives the false impression that this community is remarkably consistent. I think I’m blowing this out of proportion, though.