I didn't even read this comment, but I'm going to re-clarify anyways.<p>When I see something overtly bad: a troll, something irretrievably wrong from a technical perspective, or an over-the-line personal attack with no redeeming content, I'll reliably downvote it.<p>Otherwise, I don't vote. I'd rather reply to something than vote it down anonymously, and if you're going to reply, downvoting the parent is counterproductive; it effectively asks the site to bury your comment along with the parent.<p>I'm sure I routinely downvote things out of pique just like everybody else, and I'm sure I occasionally upvote things too. Those events cancel each other out. Meanwhile, I'm still reliably downvoting bad stuff. Hence, 65%.<p>To be honest, I don't really care what you think of how I use the site. I just want to speak up in defense of the idea that up/down percentages don't matter. Like short sales, downvotes contribute to the efficiency of the site, just like upvotes do.<p><i>PS: Now I have read it, and I'm glad I didn't before I wrote the comment above. Come off it. If you want to know how I got to ridiculous levels of karma --- besides commenting a lot --- I'll tell you: once you get to a certain level of karma (which we'll treat as a proxy for all sorts of other reputation effects on HN), it becomes self-reinforcing. You and I could make the exact same comment and I will reliably get voted higher than you, because fewer people expect "good" comments from you. So, go ahead and downvote me as much as you'd like. You'd actually be making my comment scores more accurate.</i>