I've thought of doing that. Maybe. But not all comments disagree, and frankly I wouldn't want to do anything that increased the proportion that do.

You seem to imply in the essay that disagreeing comments are more valuable than agreeing ones, though:

"And when you agree there's less to say. You could expand on something the author said, but he has probably already explored the most interesting implications. When you disagree you're entering territory he may not have explored"

That does not imply they are more valuable; rather, it is human nature to respond to a statement that you feel you can "correct". It is an ego boost, if nothing else.

To me, cooperative, exploratory statements are the most valuable.

"That is a interesting opinion, I've never heard that perspective. But what about case xyz, have you considered that."

In that context, it is much easier to build up interesting information trees, rather than simply staying stuck on one (often minor or irrelevant) node.