[newuser88273]

Under that assumption, upvote should not be a way to voice agreement, as that implies that downvote is disagreement. But downvote leads to graying-out and disappearance, which is just perfect to induce the hive mind.

And yes, downvoting into oblivion articulate comments not at all devoid of content really has become endemic here, and many (though certainly not all) of those I read anyway were obviously downvoted for disagreement, often political. The result is a strong hive mind at HN. (I've seen seen that opinion on HN voiced outside of HN more than once.)

[rjaco31]

> downvoting into oblivion articulate comments not at all devoid of content really has become endemic here, and many (though certainly not all) of those I read anyway were obviously downvoted for disagreement, often political

Maybe I'm biased, but I personally had the opposite feeling, the majority of the comments I see grayed out are usually somehow aggressive/salty rants that don't really try to bring anything useful to the thread, and the few other ones are comments with technical details that are plain wrong.

[newuser88273]

I probably unconsciously undercount "legitimate" grey-outs, so... maybe. Still, you really can't have all three of these: (1) Votes to register (dis-)agreement and (2) very prominent visual effect of downvotes, yet (3) no hivemind induction.

I'm not lobbying for changes. The whole up/downvote business is really hard, maybe there's no better way. Just thought people here might be interested in the fact that HN has been getting somewhat of a hivemind reputation, lately.