If you really think Microsoft cares so much what score your comments get on HN that they are paying people to downvote you, you need to take a deep breath and regain some objectivity. Your comment was downvoted because it was rude and confrontational.
People post things on HN all the time that criticize Microsoft without getting downvoted — because they do it without antagonizing other HN users.
I think my comment was not rude but merely common sense. If I see a commercial for laundry detergent on TV and they compare their product with another laundry detergent, the company doing the advertising will surely have a description of the exact method of testing they used. I am not sure why microsoft should be held to a lower standard.
Anyways, to perform my own little test, I re-wrote my post in an overwhelmingly nice way, and still got downvoted. So, no, it does not seem that the comment was downvoted for being rude.
> Your comment was downvoted because it was rude and confrontational.
I didn't read that at all. The situation, as it stands, involves claims and counterclaims and only one side of the argument appears as third-party verifiable. It's only natural to question why an apparent rebuttal from Microsoft doesn't come with any transparency (again!)
IMO, down voting the GP for pointing this out is bullshit.
People post things on HN all the time that criticize Microsoft without getting downvoted — because they do it without antagonizing other HN users.