Because reddit unironically has better decorum around usage of their upvote/downvote system than HN does.
replyPeople on HN downvote objectively correct information because they don't like it 24/7. There's a reason the creator of Zig left and gave the computer version of a middle finger on the way out to HN!
You define OPs post as "objectively correct information" even though it is an unknown future event for which they provided zero evidence?
replyThere's nothing wrong about that. Historically I have experienced this behaviour on hackernews multiple times, hence my comment.
replySince when have hackernews started to become toxic like stackoverflow used to be?
fwiw pg said early on that downvoting for disagreement is perfectly fine: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171
replycommenting about voting is also something the HN guidelines warns against:
> Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.
Reminds me of telling employees to not discuss their wages. If voting here is such a toxic experience, maybe HN needs to wake up and smell the garbage.
replydeleted
reply