[jasonlotito]

> There's are differences between a down vote because one disagrees with the author, and a down vote because one believes the author is ill-informed and spreading misinformation, and a down vote because the author is being downright juvenile.

The difference is that the first two should not be voted down. If you vote down, you should not comment. If you comment, it means at the very least the comment added to the conversation, unless your comment is also not worth posting and you should be voted down as well.

It's fairly simple: does the comment bring value to the conversation? If it does so directly, vote up. If only indirectly, than don't. If it does not, vote down.

Whether you disagree or not is irrelevant. And someone being ill-informed should be corrected. At the very least, by writing an incorrect comment, they are presenting an opportunity to be corrected.

> I don't want people to be unable to express their views, but when the mean-spirited people who contribute nothing but nonsense start to represent a large percentage of a community, it's reasonable to see if anything can be done.

Things can already be done. Vote down and don't reply. That is the best way. Vote down and ignore.