I'm curious if you considered that the reason people preamble their posts with this is because they have gotten multiple downvotes in the past for something they said which was reasonable? My understanding is that downvotes should not be cast for dissenting opinions or unpopular but logical statements. However, my experience with the site is that this happens from time to time. Thankfully, there is sufficient traffic so that the situation often (but not always) rectifies it self .. i.e. people tend to upvote good comments. I'm relatively new to the site so am still trying to figure it out.
To this end, I feel the cap of -10 on downvotes was a great idea. It lets someone post an unpopular (but hopefully logically sound) argument with the knowledge that they will lose a capped amount of karma.
"I know I'll get downvoted" is also sometimes code for "this post is so awesome you probably won't understand it, but go ahead and downvote because I don't care about little minded people like you."
It certainly can happen that something reasonable gets a lot of downvotes. But not nearly as often as it happens that something unreasonable (or stupid or irrelevant or otherwise unhelpful) gets a lot of downvotes even though its author thinks it's a useful contribution.
I think "I know I'll get downvoted ..." usually just indicates (not a long tragic history of getting downvoted for insightful comments, but) roughly what it says: the author expects to get downvotes -- and probably hopes to get fewer by saying s/he expects them. HN is better off without those preambles because (1) they're a waste of space -- learning that the author of something expected downvotes tells you nothing useful -- and (2) they distort the scoring system, which (for all its flaws) does help to order comments well and identify ones that aren't going to be worth reading.
Also, the only reason the author would expect their comment to be downvoted is because 1) its insightful, but unpopular and 2) because the author knows right well that the post adds little value, is off-topic or detracts from the conversation.
If its #1, then you must clearly state your argument. A well thought out, but unpopular, opinion normally doesn't get as many downvotes as a not so well thought out opinion.
If its #2, then maybe the author should simply refrain from posting.
> To this end, I feel the cap of -10 on downvotes was a great idea.
Is there really such a cap? Back when comment scores were displayed, there was a minimum display score, but actual score could go far below it, with no apparent minimum. Such a cap would be/is a very good idea, of course.
To this end, I feel the cap of -10 on downvotes was a great idea. It lets someone post an unpopular (but hopefully logically sound) argument with the knowledge that they will lose a capped amount of karma.