In that case - I upvoted your initial comment. I did not downvote the "complaint list" comment until it had grown quite large.
I think your characterization of your "complaint" comment is inaccurate, and I was trying to induce you to revisit it, because otherwise you're arguing from false premises. I don't think the initial comment should have been downvoted! However, your response was not useful to you for your expressed purpose of eliciting clarification on feedback, or to me or (apparently) the LW-emergent-consciousness for contributing to valuable discussion. It was downvoted for these reasons - and they're good ones!
Of particular note is your unwarranted confidence that people who disagree with you are "irrational" and "dumb". You did not have access to sufficient information to conclude this! In fact, if they were downvoting you because they expected your comment to lead to unproductive discussion, they were right.
More to the point, have you considered that you may have erred in this thread?
I did not downvote the "complaint list" comment until it had grown quite large.
I'm trying to understand your reasoning here, and failing. Do you downvote controversial things often? Are you upset with the quality of my comments, or with the quality of all of the comments that followed? Why does it make sense to downvote simply because one of my comments drew lots of attention and anger?
To me, this does not make sense. Please explicitly state your rationale.
I think your characterization of your "complaint" comment is inaccurate
In ...
Here's the new thread for posting quotes, with the usual rules: