[whositis]

That assumes people downvote only when a comment is not good or relevant.

They don't. The majority of people will downvote the comment because they disagree with it.

There is no way to disagree with the groupthink, without expecting to be downvoted.

[soundwave106]

Upvoted you, because the people who downvoted you unfortunately proved your point. :(

I personally would love it if downvotes required an explanation. Such would be a great way to separate the "your comment was out of line for legitimate reason" type of downvote vs. the "I'm downvoting you because you're wrong and I'm not even going to say why" type of downvote.

You can learn something from the former type of downvote; the later sort of downvote is completely useless.

[JoeAltmaier]

Sort of true. You can also ask questions, use less invective, and start by validating the post's view and then expand on it.

It comes down to, its more effective to lead a conversation than to just dispute and disagree. Its true on the internet; its true in person.

[chrishacken]

It's ironic that your comment was downvoted; because everything you said is exactly why it was. It's not that your idea is a bad theory or negative; people downvoted it because they didn't agree with it.

[hx87]

> There is no way to disagree with the groupthink, without expecting to be downvoted.

Then expect to be downvoted without explicitly posting that expectation. Nothing good will come of it.

[whositis]

Why? It's just another way of saying "I realise fully that this is not a popular opinion amongst most users of this website"

[grzm]

At the end of the day, it's against site guidelines:

Please resist commenting about being downvoted. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.

Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downvote you or proclaim that you expect to get downvoted.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

You may not agree with it (which is fine), but it's largely accepted by the community.