This is interesting. No one gives any reason I'm wrong about what I said. I don't quite see the purpose of downmodding a post that's already on the bottom and greyed out. But I guess no one is going to explain their reasons.
Generally, people that pervade hacker news are pretty sensitive to cultivate a high signal to noise ratio, probably because a lot of us have the 'slippery slope' mentality, and seen what can happen if you give and inch, if Reddit and Digg are any indication.
In the guidelines:
"Resist complaining about being downmodded. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. "
If your comments don't add any information to the topic at hand, it usually gets downmodded. Exceptions seem to be if they're wise-ass or snarky comments.
How come people who want a high signal to noise ratio, downmod a short, helpful comment which lets someone know not write "thanks" 6 times? In other words, I was asking someone to improve the signal to noise ratio.
As far as getting downmodded for my additional comments, I expected that and don't mind. I have read the rules. BTW, I do think people here are far too inclined to downmod stuff they dislike without refuting it.
In the guidelines: "Resist complaining about being downmodded. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. "
If your comments don't add any information to the topic at hand, it usually gets downmodded. Exceptions seem to be if they're wise-ass or snarky comments.