I'm just a random reader and member of the community, and I haven't consciously down-voted you in the past, but I absolutely down-voted and flagged this comment, and the one in response to Knieveltech.
I don't know who you are, I don't have anything against you, and I haven't voted either way on your main comment, but I really don't think such name-calling and vitriol are appropriate or have any place in a community I would want to be a part of. I don't think such comments add to the discussion, or are in line with the guidelines linked in the site's footer. So I've voted according.
Hopefully that helps explain where some of the down-votes are coming from.
I was attacked, downvoted, for my main comment, and then defended myself. This is NOT nearly the first time for such. Usually the result of the downvote is to send my comment to the end of the thread where it is effectively lost, which is clearly the intention of the MOD.
Why a MOD? Because only a small fraction of the users can downvote, and users instead of the MOD attacking me personally write rebuttals. So far I have not a single rebuttal to any of the content of my original post. I did a great service to some lost CS profs -- outlined for them how to publish and, then, got attacked by a MOD.
Then I defended myself. You found my defense offensive. It was, but not nearly as much as that of the attack of the MOD.
I've never ever heard of a "mod" affecting comments or somehow modifying the karma of a given comment. I'm sure that PG would not give a mod that power (though, he does alone hell-bans which I find in poor taste considering how many legitimate comments I've seen dead-on-arrival).
Because there is a pattern that would not apply to the relatively random users and needs a very persistent user, that is, a MOD. Because the downvotes happen QUICKLY, as if from a MOD. Because the downvotes don't come with replies. Because only a small fraction of users can downvote. Because part of the pattern of what gets downvoted is material that is relatively advanced technically and, really, a challenge to CS.
My original post was a nice contribution to CS people having trouble getting published. But, if people don't like such a contribution, then they won't have it. So, I deleted it. It's gone. The CS profs can continue to struggle to publish without my help.
You dismiss the possibility that your tone is consistently offensive. Also, you perhaps underestimate the amount of traffic HN generates.
"The CS profs can continue to struggle to publish without my help."
This is emblematic of what I find grating in your writing style (and why I downvoted the parent post). In a single sentence you have managed to communicate (intentionally or otherwise) a sense of hubris and entitlement.
I'm sorry to hear this, but it's possible that the mods aren't doing this out of malice.
I used to help out HN by going to the new page and flagging what I thought was off topic content. My reward for this was to have my flagging privliges taken away :)
The unfortunate reality is that when you are a mod it's far easier to punish than it is to educate, especially when you're a volunteer.
early in the article was that the 'community' had a "serious problem" which was getting published. So I outlined how to get published, and that should have been a welcome contribution.
It wasn't very clear in the article if the article was mostly about the community or the 'problems' of the community. Whatever, I gave a solution to what seemed in the article to be the most important "problem" of the community.
But my solution wasn't welcome, so I deleted it. CS profs can struggle on their own to get published without my help.
I don't know who you are, I don't have anything against you, and I haven't voted either way on your main comment, but I really don't think such name-calling and vitriol are appropriate or have any place in a community I would want to be a part of. I don't think such comments add to the discussion, or are in line with the guidelines linked in the site's footer. So I've voted according.
Hopefully that helps explain where some of the down-votes are coming from.