Just expand the example: pretend it was "that is not the way mysql works blah blah explanation". I agree that I don't want to read this if it has 2 points but I do if it has 100.
I wonder how these people ever managed to make it through a newspaper without scores telling them which articles are worth it.
Learn to survey, skim, and dive in. All your endeavors will be the better for it.
PS. Your method (don't read if don't like score) also ensures you won't be soiled by accidentally reading an unpopular but truthful point of view.
You make an excellent point, applicable here: newspaper brand = web brand.
Articles not flagged [dead] on news.ycombinator.com already ensure some quality, and both similarly share a "front page".
My point was comparing newspapers brands/articles to HN comments, not articles, since you don't have much guidance anymore over what comments are worthwhile or not.
Then why sort comments at all? just order them in date order (or the reverse) and be done with it. Let the reader decide what is useful and what isn't.
Seems like having comments sorted in an implicit order of 'goodness' (even if there is no score) would handicap people in the development of their ability to 'survey, skim and dive in'.