Rule 0: this isn't reddit. Pointing out this isn't reddit isn't a shallow dismissal, it is an apt response to an equally shallow pun/joke.
Rule -1: you shouldn't downvote for disagreeing unless you post some substantive or tangible response. If the post doesn't deserve a response, you should report the post.
Sorting comments by popularity, with the convention of Up=agree down=disagree, just promotes populist opinions explicitly.
A much better metric would be the amount of responses a post gets divided by the entropic density of the post/thread.
4 paragraphs of "musk bad. rust good." gets 13 replies? decent.
Posting "Whataboutism is whataboutism.", gets 40+ responses, back and forths, multiple tangents of discourse, all in a fraction of the timeframe.
Which one results in a more higher-quality discourse? As it is now, the circle jerk floats to the top like a buoy, the actual discourse gets hidden in a spectrum of contrast.
The presentation, ranking, sorting, and conventions of all major aggregative and news sites forgo a metric that optimizes for quality (of discussions) and instead optimizes for quantity of participation, no matter the detriment.
minimaxing shallow PKI's and forgoing second-order effects, as always.