I do explain your failures. I explain your failures in detail. What I do not do, is commit unbounded time to answering your (or anyone's) followup questions when I believe I have already answered them and/or the benefits no longer exceed the costs (ETC).

I believe that modding me down for a calm, honest, non-inflammatory statement of my opinion of you, is not something a mature individual would do. (Remember, it was the "deeming you in error" that I said was common, not "you being in error in some more objective or universal sense".)

(While we're on the topic, I seem to remember a long flamewar in which you also stopped giving additional clarification to those who asked what their error was -- specifically, how to know if they're being sexist. Keep in mind, no one who asked for help ever got a good enough model of what you count as sexism to generate the same answers that you did -- note the "If I were rich I'd have a gardener" problem.)

Just for the record, there actually are instances when I have regarded your comments highly. Just two examples off the top of my head.

If and when you make comments with merit, I mod you up, without regard for any stupidity you might have revealed in the past. I might read your remarks a bit less, but if I see one that's good, I mod it up. I do not, however, downmod you simply for saying something that's not "on my side" -- in fact, I recognize my own biases in flamewars and avoid modding when it's likely to negatively influence my judgment.

If you call that "not liking you", that just means you can't distinguish liking a person from liking an argument.