You should add more info like "Hey, a little OT, but here's how the process works. Etc" to avoid down votes for lack of contribution.
I've probably down voted someone less than 20 times on HN, but when I do I like to leave a comment as to why. Its been the case where I've been down voted and wondered why.
His comment isn't a troll comment and looking at his past comments he seems to be reasonable, intelligent, and otherwise a productive member of HN. I wanted him to know why I downvoted him, and he can consider changing the post to offer more insight in which case he would attract more upvotes and would generally make HN a better place.
What makes my comment more productive is that I articulated why I down voted which is that it lacked any insight into the process and didn't contribute to the conversation.
If this were Reddit, I'd be attaching the Jackie Chan face right about here.
I went back and looked for were I was slightly patronizing and the only thing I could find was this line: "So, you had two of your photos chosen for this release or no? Is that rare?" Which I can see how that could be more than slightly patronizing if it was read in a way that I hadn't intended it to be.
What I was trying to say is that for a project as big as Ubuntu, having two photos chosen seems to be a big deal. I didn't realize this when I originally down voted you, and I just wanted clarity.
In any case it was never my intention to be patronizing, so I'm sorry for coming across that way.
If you want to know what the process was, why not just ask? If you don't actually care, then just move on.
Thank you for trying to keep up the quality of conversation here.
The process for choosing an Ubuntu wallpaper goes thusly:
* A new, public flickr group is created.
* People bung their photos/art in there.
* The previous 'winners' choose the next wallpapers.
So, you had two of your photos chosen for this release or no? Is that rare?
Thanks for the context in how it works. Do you see any trends in what gets picked over what doesn't. I assume more abstract is usually better?