[typetehcodez]

No. Don't do this. I don't want the comments here to have a chilling filter like this. We need diversity of opinions even if some of them aren't liked. That is part and parcel of healthy debate. There should be fringe opinions on the sidelines getting attention - that's how we innovate. Tools like this are chilling, sensor ideas that may be controversial but innovative, and stifle healthy dialog.

[jbob2000]

Would you share the same thought if you had read my comment history? People post dumb, uninteresting things all the time. I don't want a collection of my dumb thoughts to follow me around.

[typetehcodez]

After reading through some of your older, down-voted comments, I noticed a trend of rebuttals. Both your comments and their replies are valuable points of conversation in the topics. While you may think some are

> dumb, uninteresting

That is a subjective opinion, and that's okay. If I was searching Hacker News on a topic, I expect to see both sides, or multiple sides, of a topic so I can try and make an informed opinion myself. Are those old posts, "dumb" and "uninteresting" and merely because they are down-voted? I would argue that while some may share this view, I do not, and I find great value in the debate and multiple opinions, and I suspect I'm not alone in this regard.

If the down-voted comments are removed, the conversation becomes heavily one-sided and it is confusing to the reader what is being argued. Just because an opinion is down-voted or unpopular, doesn't mean it is wrong. As Max Planck said, "a new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." The discussion as a whole has more value than the individual contributions, and we loose that discussion with this kind of censorship, and with it a path to new ideas.