Having thought about downvoting your post (but not, −2 seemed low enough): the problem is not obviously one worth solving. Your idea does not obviously solve the problem (if your comment had lots of downvotes with the reason given as “troll”, would you feel more informed?). There are obvious downsides to your idea, as discussed by the other replies, that you should have addressed. Any benefit from your idea, when it has been implemented on other sites (see e.g. Slashdot) is dubious.
Actually, “troll” does offer some information. It means the downvote was because the comment was perceived as an effort to stir up pointless conflict, rather than for it being wrong, poorly proofread, redundant, or a multitude of other possible reasons.
Having thought about downvoting your post (but not, −2 seemed low enough): the problem is not obviously one worth solving. Your idea does not obviously solve the problem (if your comment had lots of downvotes with the reason given as “troll”, would you feel more informed?). There are obvious downsides to your idea, as discussed by the other replies, that you should have addressed. Any benefit from your idea, when it has been implemented on other sites (see e.g. Slashdot) is dubious.
Actually, “troll” does offer some information. It means the downvote was because the comment was perceived as an effort to stir up pointless conflict, rather than for it being wrong, poorly proofread, redundant, or a multitude of other possible reasons.