>You are wrong. What the fuck? Its your subjective opinion that downvotes are satan’s plaything. Certainly not an objective fact. You havent established at all why no downvoting is advantageous vis a vis bad actors. You haven’t established why demoting someones comment is anti-free speech but my right to downvote isnt. You havent adressed any of the cons of having no downvotes that I pointed out, or the pros of having downvotes. You havent adressed any of the points I made about how the cons of downvotes could be mitigated. Why should I accept your opinion as objective fact when you refuse to even discuss the pros and cons of either implementation? When you just cite “muh shills” or “muh free speech” alternately whenever it suits you with out explaining why? You dont even explain what you mean by shill behavior. I mean do shills have free speech? Is this “legitimate conversation and maximum engagement?” Or is this you just abitrarily just declaring that your opinion of downvoting is the correct one and mine is failed theory? I call fake news. You dont give a fuck about free speech or you wouldnt have instigated this exchange with me instead of respecting my opinion on downvoting. You just need to “correct” my thinking . And finally in the end, the mask comes off and Im capriciously told “You’re wrong”. Because. Like you’re Anthony Fauci or something. Nobody’s allowed to have an opinion on downvoting other than yours? Fuck that. I dont know why you had to start shit with me over my perfectly valid opinion that downvotes are good and useful and *my* idea of **free speech** but I guess it’s because you’re a **SHILL**. Do I need to prove you’re a shill or even state what I think a shill is? Nah, I think I’ll be **arbitrary as fuck like you are.**