[Yzupnick]

Why would you downvote a well-intentioned but wrong comment? If something is wrong, explain why it is wrong. Downvotes, I think, should be reserved for comments that are 1) pointless ex:"agree" or "great post" 2) mean ex: "How could you be so ignorant!" 3) Way off topic.

Everything else should get ignored or warrants further discussion. In some cases it is even important to upvote "wrong" comments.

[derefr]

Downvoting is essentially the perscriptivist form of "should get ignored," as it moves things downward on the page (where fewer users are likely to find it before getting bored.)

[davidw]

If someone states that it is their firm belief that the Earth does indeed sit at the center of the universe, with the sun revolving around it, I just can't agree with it, and think it should not be a highly rated comment.

Same sort of deal when people are factually wrong, but aren't being a jerk about it: I don't think they should rate that highly, but I wouldn't likely vote them into negative territory either. And yeah, I might leave a comment too.

[3am]

Then don't upvote then, it's simple! Remember http://xkcd.com/386/

I always thought that the saving grace of /. was the metamoderation. People here downvote based on personal bias here frequently enough, and it would be nice to have the bad actors dinged for it. I'm not saying you do this, but it is done. Far better to have a highly upvoted correction.

[davidw]

> Then don't upvote then, it's simple!

Downvoting obviously wrong comments is very simple too. And useful. Like I said though, in the past I've tended to do so because it's incorrect, not to "punish" as I might with a mean-spirited comment, so I would never go past -1.

[bmelton]

100% agree. I think the core of our problem is that downvote is used differently everywhere else, and so people have an expectation when they come here that simply isn't true.

Naturally, the other end of that is a problem too, wherein people upvote for all the wrong reasons. I all too often see an comment that is wrong, but perhaps clever, and is upvoted highly. The most interesting aspect, I think, is that if you put a well-reasoned explanation of why the comment is wrong, you'll often see the trend reverse -- the wrong comment will start getting downvotes, and the correction will start getting upvotes. This might SEEM right, on first blush, but it also isn't.

The thing that irks me most though, is perhaps the hero-worship. I think if we were able to hide usernames until after we'd voted, then we'd almost certainly have better results. I cringe every time pg posts a one-liner that adds nothing to the conversation; Not because it isn't perfectly within his right to do so, but because I know it's going to be upvoted to the sky.