Occasionally someone will show up here and try to flame-bait us, not really arguing (or not responding to counterarguments) but just trying to provoke people with contrary opinions. (This is, after all, the Internet.) It's obvious from your other contributions that you're not doing that, but someone who'd only seen your two comments above might have wrongly assumed otherwise. I was explaining why the downvotes should be taken back, as it appears they were. By the way, the mainstream view among Less Wrong readers is that any evidence we've seen for theism is far too weak to overcome the prior improbability of such a sneakily complex hypothesis (and that much of the evidence that we might expect from such a hypothesis is absent); but there are a few generally respected theists around here. The community norm on theism has more to do with how people conduct themselves in disputes than with the fact of disagreement— but you should be prepared for a lot of us to talk amongst ourselves as if atheism is a settled question, and not be too offended by that. (Consider it a role reversal from an atheist's social interactions with typical Americans.) I've enjoyed my exchanges with you so far, and look forward to more!

Awwwww, I'm not against you. I just think you're incorrect. If you post on Less Wrong a lot, you'll eventually say something several posters will disagree with, and some of them will say so. Try not to interpret it as a personal attack - taking it personally makes it harder to rationally evaluate new arguments and evidence. I wouldn't expect the karma system to be much of a problem, by the way. If I remember rightly, your karma can't go below 0, so you can continue posting comments even if it falls to zero.