This is criticism, IMO it's stupid criticism that should deserve a downvote, but you still wasted time to write it and it's ok, according to OP view of things, you responded to his words with some ad hominem attack, it's pointless and dumb in my opinion, but you put in the effort to respond and presented your arguments.
Compare it to the blind downvoting, you get downvoted, with no reasoning, not knowing who did it and if you get 4 of them your comment gets hidden.
Just 4.
I much prefer your ad hominems to hypotetical perfectly valid downvotes.
At least now people can form an opinion on what you wrote.
With downvotes people just assume that the comment was worthless or worse.
What if you had to reply to the comment before being able to downvote it?
It would at least be a bit less anonymous.
They clearly do, to you. I understand that upvotes-only systems are more compatible with your ego, but if I were to downvote this it would be because you don't have a persuasive argument for why an upvotes-only feedback system (which can also be easily gamed) is any better than one which supports both.