Would love to hear an explanation from a downvoter so a discussion could be had.
Just saying “no I don’t like that” (Ie a commentless downvote, assuming the comment isn’t inappropriate), is, IMHO, kind of like trying to win a debate by going “booo! I don’t like that.”
Not very hackery. More like just being a plain old hack.
In this case, down-voting without commenting is ok - your comment didn't contain any rationale so no rationale is required to dismiss it - consider e.g. if you had said "I like Firefox better than Chrome" instead of that you liked government funded enterprises better than privately funded enterprises. Without an explanation why, it's basically just noise.
We also live in a society where private relationships (both personal and business) are the default. When arguing for something other than the default, your burden to provide a rationale is greater. So the omission is especially glaring.
> private relationships (both personal and business) are the default.
What on earth is a "private personal relationship" as opposed to a "public personal relationship"?
If you meant the whole tired "less government in our lives" thing, well, where do you think the internet came from? What do you think poll numbers show about public support for Medicare?
Just saying “no I don’t like that” (Ie a commentless downvote, assuming the comment isn’t inappropriate), is, IMHO, kind of like trying to win a debate by going “booo! I don’t like that.”
Not very hackery. More like just being a plain old hack.