Yes, that is true but in the case of someone asserting something counter to common wisdom then I would err on the side of caution and not downvote. Better to reply directly and point out why they are probably wrong if you have the knowledge to do so.
What really depresses is that they have a similar system on the comments for various UK newspaper websites (Daily Mail I'm looking at you) and you often find that the most uprated comments (which are then displayed at the top of the comments section) are arguments that allot of people may agree with but the arguments (and often the spelling) presented are just terrible and usually consist only of an Ad hominem attack on some person or organisation.
I generally find a thoughtful defense of an unpopular viewpoint a much more interesting read than somebody who thinks they are clever by posting some content free attack on something that is trendy to hate.
Ok, this rant is way off topic now and thankfully this sort of thing seems to be mostly absent from HN :)
What really depresses is that they have a similar system on the comments for various UK newspaper websites (Daily Mail I'm looking at you) and you often find that the most uprated comments (which are then displayed at the top of the comments section) are arguments that allot of people may agree with but the arguments (and often the spelling) presented are just terrible and usually consist only of an Ad hominem attack on some person or organisation.
I generally find a thoughtful defense of an unpopular viewpoint a much more interesting read than somebody who thinks they are clever by posting some content free attack on something that is trendy to hate.
Ok, this rant is way off topic now and thankfully this sort of thing seems to be mostly absent from HN :)