I explained why in the thread. To further expand why: people work off of score. People like instant feedback. Outside viewers can more easily navigate a conversation with some form of indication to what is generally seen of each point made by any other party. There are things which would need to be worked out. Off the top of my head one would be people snap replying, voting; then deleting their post. This would only need to be necessary for downvotes. Additionally; Each account could have a weighted score to indicate how much a downvote mattered versus anothers. If I'm an account that constantly spams garbage and regularly gets downvoted. Then my comments should be worth less than someone who regularly sources everything they claim or assert. That begs the question: how would this weight be calculated? A users own upvote/downvote ratio or a user's received upvote / downvote ratio. IMHO they are both useful. But I'm not sure how to specifically apply each best. ________________________________________________________ edit below from my comment ITT; Or a two tiered scoring system using decimals. Here's what I mean and how; Each post has 3 values tracked - upvotes - downvotes by people who haven't replied - downvotes by people who have replied And they are displayed such as; >Anticlutch 12 pts (+20|-8.12) 11 min ago Where the 12 is the overall value gained from [upvotes] - [downvotes by people who replied]. The 8 is the number of downvotes by people who replied. The 12 is the downvotes by people who didn't reply. This could further be expanded into; >Anticlutch 12.6 pts (+20.13|-8.7) 11 min ago Where the 12.6 indicates the total sum of upvotes versus downvotes by whether the upvoting/downvoting account replied or not. Where 20.13 is 20 people who replied also upvoted AND 13 people who DID NOT reply also upvoted. Where -8.7 is 8 people who replied also downvoted AND 7 people who DID NOT reply also downvoted. :) sorry about the headache. If further explanation or clarification is necessary just ask.