No. I am stating that this attitude of "downvote when disagreeing" could lead to structural discrimination against minorities. That is exactly what I'm saying, nothing more, nothing less.
As a side note, I have often wished folks could see their downvote count or at least an upvote to downvote ratio. In the past I wondered if I was quicker to downvote, when I had the ability, than upvote.
I think that's cold for you to wilfuly misinterpret my point so. Fine, we'll apply it to the gold standard. In news.y for the 1800s someone recommending moving away from the gold standard would get downvoted to hell by those that "disagree". Their comment would grey and vanish to most.
By encouraging downvoting disagreements you encourage large consensus to shut out contradictory voices by downvoting them, regardless of the voracity of their arguments. This means that all voices are significantly constrained by the habits of the present as opposed to attempts at deriving truths that are correct regardless of the age.
IMO downvoting for disagreement is entitled behaviour because its greedily taking an extra vote. You get an upvote for agreement, to upvote AND downvote is two votes. Why should some people get two votes?
I don't see what I wrote as a willful misinterpretation. I guess I could have added sexist, homophobic, etc to the list.
As for downvoting in general, I may not be able to fully appreciate your argument because of a fundamental difference in expectations. I don't really care about downvotes or upvotes or any other fake internet validation of my value. If people want to flag my comments or vote them up or down, fine. I don't see downvotes for disagreement as a way to oppress me. The rules on this site allow downvoting for disagreement and I chose to comment here.
You were acting exasperated that I mentioned race but the example I chose wasn't relevant to the discussion. Apologies for choosing a contentious subject but in my defence you did write.
> This seems to be the final argument nowadays when all else fails.
Where you are stating my points have all failed and I'm grasping at straws: RUDE.
> I don't really care about downvotes or upvotes or any other fake internet validation of my value.
Neither do I and you're missing the point if you interpret it as karma-whoring. The point isn't you and isn't me, its the impact on the readers, the lurkers, on the 80% (us that write comments are always a minority) and if spread broadly enough: society. Its an outcome that prizes public consensus of a view over its voracity and I think that's a poor guideline to have in the coffee shops of the modern era.
Edit: And I apologize if what I wrote came off as rude. It was more an observation of current events that got directed at you. I'll try and do better.