Interesting observation since, IMO, unlimited "moderation powers" has been the biggest problem with Digg and (as of late) Reddit. I'm hopeful that HN can avoid this fate (no downvotes until the karma threshold is reached seems to help somewhat).
IMHO, the worst part about HN is the extreme homogeneity, and the system is designed to reinforce this. The recent discussion about display points is an example of this. Removing points is said to "reduce arguments" ... which is really just another way of "reducing disagreement".
Lately there have been too many people "going against the grain", and that has caused the overall perceived quality of the site to go down.
Contrast that with Reddit where I can link to all kinds of supporting studies but if it's contrary to the hivemind's opinion, I'll get downvoted to oblivion while someone with a differing opinion based on something he heard from his best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend will get an upvote for an unsupported opinion that aligns with the group.
Of course that's just anecdotal experience on my part, so perhaps you're correct and this comment should be downvoted :)
Getting karma here happens with little effort. I have trouble losing karma! It generally only happens when a comment really strikes a nerve[1] like in the suicide thread. My top level comment went pretty far negative (surprises me to see it back to 0 points). My nested comment with nearly the same sentiment as the top level currently sits at +29.
I never check a user's krama on HN prior to giving his opinion any weight. You have less karma than I do. Does that change anything whatever about this discussion? In fact you have a bunch of replies telling you how you get it wrong, and your dissenting comment has done just fine.