[palata]

But it did not say "this language sucks". To me it was kind of asking something like "is Java still relevant nowadays?", in a polite way. It actually got a few interesting answers ("Java sucks" probably wouldn't).

I believe that it's enough to not upvote a message if you find it irrelevant. The upvoted messages will stay at the top. It is not completely off-topic: the people who will read the featured article have knowledge about Java, after all.

My concern is just that downvoting is fairly aggressive. You don't need to be massively downvoted many times to effectively end up being silenced (if you are moderated 2-3 times while you wrote a polite, genuine question, chances are that you won't come back). By aggressively downvoting everything that we don't find particularly relevant, I feel like it just encourages bubbles. "We are a group of Java enthusiast, just don't come talk to us if you are not a Java enthusiast yourself. Find a group of people who has the same preferences as you do instead".

[self_awareness]

I also don't understand the downvotes; the original post was polite and informative, the "moderator" throwing downvotes was aggressive, and more harm was done than help.

I have the upvote counters hidden, because I don't want to see some misguided individual to influence what should be important for me, and what shouldn't. I make my own filtering choices.

I wish that one day the internet will realize that upvote counters are more harmful than they are useful, just as it realized for downvotes. Upvotes in general promote bubbles.

[palata]

I would like to note the irony: my comment above is being downvoted as well :D. It is starting to feel like the kind of toxicity I find on StackOverflow.

[azinman2]

They seem to disagree :) Given I was polite, curious, and not leaving a “throwaway comment” that was on the broader topic (let alone the numerous substantive replies), it’s giving zealotry to me. Oh well.