I think this is a bad idea, for the following reasons:
1. Threads about moderation tend to be really boring. People discussing things on a forum can be interesting, whereas people discussing the forum on which they're discussing the forum tends to get pretty old pretty quick. If every downmod is followed by a thread about why it got downmodded, including the occasional "oh come now it wasn't that bad" type comment, signal-to-noise will drop considerably, and signal-to-noise is the exact thing which the whole moderation system supposedly exists to increase.
2. Usually when I see a downmodded comment it's pretty obvious why it's been downmodded. Occasionally a worthwhile comment will reach 0 due to the action of one person (in which case, life's tough, suck it up) but severely-downmodded comments always seem to be either belligerent or content-free.
3. Doing so would, as someone else said, discourage downmodding. But rampant downmodding isn't a severe problem at present, and a lack of downmodding potentially could be.
1. Threads about moderation tend to be really boring. People discussing things on a forum can be interesting, whereas people discussing the forum on which they're discussing the forum tends to get pretty old pretty quick. If every downmod is followed by a thread about why it got downmodded, including the occasional "oh come now it wasn't that bad" type comment, signal-to-noise will drop considerably, and signal-to-noise is the exact thing which the whole moderation system supposedly exists to increase.
2. Usually when I see a downmodded comment it's pretty obvious why it's been downmodded. Occasionally a worthwhile comment will reach 0 due to the action of one person (in which case, life's tough, suck it up) but severely-downmodded comments always seem to be either belligerent or content-free.
3. Doing so would, as someone else said, discourage downmodding. But rampant downmodding isn't a severe problem at present, and a lack of downmodding potentially could be.