It is clearly not the case that someone is sytematically downvoting every comment made to this post. It is a prediction that is easily tested by hovering the mouse pointer over the karma of the comments. This will show you that many comments, including some of the older ones, are 100% positive and many more are 0% positive with 0 karma. Both of those states preclude them having been downvoted, systematically or otherwise.
Ah, I didn’t knew about that function: in that case, your analysis is absolutely correct! I retract my statement.
I am about to downvote this comment without reading further.
That, on the other side, seems wrong. You should downvote and read forward.
I encourage others to do likewise (unless you edit out the bluster)
That seems very wrong: in an environment that predicates rationality, stating that you’re wrong should be encouraged, not punished. It’s not about the downvoting, as I’ve written, it’s about downvoting unless I cancel the original statement. The shift seems to have moved, at least in your comment, from being less wrong to being right.
I refuse such a drift. I won’t edit out the statement (but I’ll gladly admit I was wrong).
That seems very wrong: in an environment that predicates rationality, stating that you’re wrong should be encouraged, not punished. It’s not about the downvoting, as I’ve written, it’s about downvoting unless I cancel the original statement.
Pardon me, I wasn’t clear. Retraction and (noted, transparent) editing can sometimes be even better than removal so of course can be included in the exception to the suggestion.
The shift seems to have moved, at least in your comment, from being less wrong to being right.
Note that wrongness isn’t the issue. It is the combination “needless provocation && wrong”. For example if there wasn’t available proof that the claim was wrong then I would perhaps still have downvoted just because the karma-drama is annoying but I would be unlikely to have also made a comment expressing criticism of the behavior.
Ah, I didn’t knew about that function: in that case, your analysis is absolutely correct! I retract my statement.
That, on the other side, seems wrong. You should downvote and read forward.
That seems very wrong: in an environment that predicates rationality, stating that you’re wrong should be encouraged, not punished. It’s not about the downvoting, as I’ve written, it’s about downvoting unless I cancel the original statement. The shift seems to have moved, at least in your comment, from being less wrong to being right.
I refuse such a drift. I won’t edit out the statement (but I’ll gladly admit I was wrong).
Pardon me, I wasn’t clear. Retraction and (noted, transparent) editing can sometimes be even better than removal so of course can be included in the exception to the suggestion.
Note that wrongness isn’t the issue. It is the combination “needless provocation && wrong”. For example if there wasn’t available proof that the claim was wrong then I would perhaps still have downvoted just because the karma-drama is annoying but I would be unlikely to have also made a comment expressing criticism of the behavior.
You might want to edit your comment if you want people to stop downvoting.