FYI, Google is not perfect and I am glad Vic Gundotra was fired, but I think things like the Scroogled campaign is probably just FUD.

I didn't complain about being down voted nor did I "invite others to down vote", I referenced a well-known phenomenon where opinions (and even statements of fact) that criticise Google are often down voted on HackerNews, simply because they are critical of Google.

The whole concept of "don't complain about being down voted" is itself quite ridiculous. Given how hacker news works (i.e. down voted comments are hidden) this effectively encourages people to simply "go with the crowd". I disagree with this entire concept. Differences of opinion, and yes even criticism, are what drive people to make things BETTER.

> But please reply to the argument

What, like identifying why I believe Google's actions are "bad", what I think they could/should have done that would be "good", and how those alternative actions would have been had a more positive outcome?

"I'll wait for the regular Google fanboy down votes" is baiting other users into downvoting you, and that is against the HN guidelines. Please stay on topic.

Also, phrases like "about as much as I would trust a priest to give me a colonoscopy" and "the usual Google fanboy response" are inflammatory and inappropriate for substantive discussion, which is what HN calls for. Please edit such flamebait out of your comments. It's understandable that it sneaks in there—we're all susceptible to it—but that's what the edit button is for. Not only will excising it not hurt your argument, it will help it considerably, and display good manners to your fellow users to boot.

If people down vote simply because I mentioned the concept of people down voting an opinion or fact simply because they disagree with it, then my point about the stupidity of the "don't mention being down voted" concept is proven true.

If people down-vote you, your words will have the connotation that they do it because that they are Google fanboys, rather than have a reasonable argument against your opinion. That is why such wording is not conductive to discussion.

The idea of down voting comments you disagree with is ridiculous anyway.

If you have a counter argument, reply.

Down voting a comment (which leads to it effectively disappearing) is the electronic equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "la la la I'm not listening" because you don't like what someone else said.

If someone posts a comment saying "I like chocolate ice cream" in a discussion about a new version of a piece of software, down vote to your hearts content.

When someone posts a comment that simply disagrees with your opinion, either ignore it or reply with a counter point.

Fair enough. Then I rephrase. Your words carry the connotation that any one who down-votes you is a Google fanboy, rather than have any valid reason permitted by the HN guidelines (whatever that may be). That is why such wording is not conductive to discussion.

And for the record, I don't have any opinion about this XMPP /Google thing. I don't even know what XMPP is, so I am perfectly neutral here.

This is not only off-topic, it's the black hole of off-topicness. Please stop.