[sanderjd]

This might come as a shock, but pg has been wrong about lots of stuff, including this. Downvotes should be used for bad comments, not comments that you disagree with. These aren't the same thing. It's fine that downvotes and upvotes aren't symmetrical in this sense. They aren't anyway - highly upvoted comments don't get bolded the way that downvoted comments get grayed.

[unmole]

> Downvotes should be used for bad comments, not comments that you disagree with.

I disagree with this. But I can't downvote this comment because it is a reply to my comment. This restriction specifically exists because downvoting to disagree is how HN has always worked.

> highly upvoted comments don't get bolded the way that downvoted comments get grayed.

Highly upvoted comments float to the top and therefore have more visibility.

[sanderjd]

> This restriction specifically exists because downvoting to disagree is how HN has always worked.

I don't think so? For instance, I can upvote replies to my comments, so it's not they have set up some "you can either comment or vote" system. This restriction is just a nudge toward positivity rather than negativity.

> Highly upvoted comments float to the top and therefore have more visibility.

Yes, but downvoted comments float down and are grayed out. The point is just that the two things aren't totally symmetrical.

(Also I think some of this stuff was implemented years after pg's pronouncement about downvotes.)

And listen, I didn't say "people who downvoted that comment aren't using HN correctly and should be booted off the site!". I just said "I think it is stupid to downvote that comment". And I do. It's stupid to downvote perfectly reasonable comments that you simply disagree with. Again, most people don't use HN that way, irrespective of anything pg said in 2008, or we would see a lot more gray comments, and I would have gotten a lot more downvotes over the years on stuff I've said that people disagree with, instead of comments telling me why I'm wrong.

[wiseowise]

Bad comments should be flagged.

[sanderjd]

Abusive comments should be flagged. Bad comments should be downvoted. There are lots of comments that are bad because they are not constructive, or are off topic, or are arguing in bad faith. These don't deserve to be flagged. They deserve to be downvoted. And there are lots of comments that are constructive and in good faith, but just reasonable to disagree with. These don't deserve downvotes, they deserve a comment disagreeing, or an upvote on an existing comment disagreeing with them.

For what it's worth, I contend that - notwithstanding what pg and dang said many years ago, this is the revealed preference of most HN users, because it's quite rare to see a comment that is downvoted, just because lots of people disagree with it.

[unmole]

> revealed preference of most HN users, because it's quite rare to see a comment that is downvoted, just because lots of people disagree with it.

This does not match my experience at all.

[sanderjd]

Outside of this thread, which seems to have brought "downvotes are for disagreement!" crusaders out of the woodwork, I essentially never see grayed out comments that are in good faith but just wrong. That may be because there are roughly the same number of people who agree with the wrong take as disagree, but I doubt it. I also get five to twenty upvotes on a comment every once in awhile, but I don't think I've ever seen more than about two downvotes on a comment, including on ones that get strong disagreement in replies. People don't just agree with me a lot more than they disagree with me, it's that most people aren't using the votes in this symmetrical agreement/disagreement way. Which I think is a good thing, even if it's not what the site's powers that be intended.