Why should anyone be penalized in any way for disagreeing? Is well thought out disagreement any less valuable than the opinion of someone who agrees with you?
Why would we as a community even want people to know which opinion is more popular (provided both opinions are intelligent and well thought out)?
As you implicitly point out, jyothi's suggestion is not how things are normally done here.
Upvoting is generally for agreement or promoting something well written. Downvoting is usually for things that are outright false or trollish. Disagreement is expressed by... well... disagreeing (yes, that means via reply) OR voting up another comment that already expresses your disagreement (no point having many people say the same thing).
I hadn't considered it until you pointed it out, but in the case of trolls, flagging is functionally the same as downvoting, so I really only downvote things that are blatantly false.
Comments
downvote <- disagree
flag <- detract
how about using it that way? May be PG can have some logic to screen all flagged conversation on flag score than a semantic scan or abusive content.
Why should anyone be penalized in any way for disagreeing? Is well thought out disagreement any less valuable than the opinion of someone who agrees with you?
Why would we as a community even want people to know which opinion is more popular (provided both opinions are intelligent and well thought out)?
As you implicitly point out, jyothi's suggestion is not how things are normally done here.
Upvoting is generally for agreement or promoting something well written. Downvoting is usually for things that are outright false or trollish. Disagreement is expressed by... well... disagreeing (yes, that means via reply) OR voting up another comment that already expresses your disagreement (no point having many people say the same thing).
I hadn't considered it until you pointed it out, but in the case of trolls, flagging is functionally the same as downvoting, so I really only downvote things that are blatantly false.