would it be less presumptious to say 'the 5 monks who want nothing ever to change, the 10 monks who don't want to implement the change, the 15 monks who are ideologicaly opposed to the change and the 6 monks who habit Anonymous'?
Well, not much (at least, assuming you phrased it in a way that made it seem like you actually thought those numbers meant something), but it would be less asinine, since you wouldn't be making a blanket assertion that everybody who disagrees with you is doing so for the worst and most self-serving of possible reasons. Myself, I didn't downvote the original node because I felt it had been hit hard enough, but I did downvote the node under discussion here, because I felt it to be a pointless ad-hominem attack.
And in answer to your second question, yes, I believe it is generally considered less of a presumptuous act to assume (in the absence of any evidence in either direction) that people are acting from reasonable and moral motives than to assume the contrary. But this is neither here nor there: nobody but you has imputed a motivation to the downvoters of the original node beyond "they thought it was a bad idea"—their reasons for thinking it a bad idea may be presumed to vary. Especially given that many of them have in fact expressed such (varying) reasons elsewhere in this thread.
In reply to Re^z: No Anonymous Reply Option
by ChemBoy
in thread No Anonymous Reply Option
by artist
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |