Hai!
Let's talk about reccing comments. "What could there possibly be to discuss," you say? It is pretty basic, I'll grant. Good comments get lots of recs; lame and annoying ones don't.
Well, yes and no. As Daily Kos is many things to many people, each member has a different perspective on reccing comments, what moves them to do so, etc. So, below the fold is a bit of my perspective and, hopefully in the comments, those of other kossacks.
Admit it: every last one of us has comment-stalked him/herself. I think it's fair to say we all enjoy seeing who responded to our comments and how. Replies are fairly straightforward and tend to leave little question as to what engendered the response. But what does it mean that someone rec'd a comment?
Because it can mean a lot of things. Maybe someone rec'd it because it made them laugh. Maybe someone else rec'd it because it offered some great info while it was being witty. Sometimes, comments get recs simply because they're there.
Which brings me to what could loosely be called my point, although it's really kind of a pet peeve: I am not a fan of the practice of reccing every comment in one's diaries, simply because it renders the rec almost meaningless. I don't think we need to be encouraged to be involved here; we never would have been motivated to sign up in the first place if that were true.
And imHo, it's just annoying to comment-stalk yourself and find that the comment rec doesn't mean your words resonated with anyone in particular; you got it just for showing up. The purpose of this site is not to provide personal validation for its members and this isn't kindergarten; we don't need gold stars for participation.
Here's another example: I once stumbled upon a comment in one of my diaries that was kind of late to the game, but I just loved it. Because it was late in coming, though, it had no recs. So, I wanted to rec it because I loved it, but as I was the sole reccer, it appeared as though I rec'd it simply because it was in my diary.
I realize and accept that that is all just me being cranky/and or lazy, certainly persnickety. But this is not: comments with false/wrong info routinely get lots of recs, simply because they're there. I'm sure we've all seen it: Someone makes an assertion. Said assertion is disproven, with authoritative sources and everything. But the comment with the false assertion stands rec'd regardless. I've even seen scenarios where the same person recs both comments; the erroneous one and the corrective one.
And this is where I think my point ceases to be 100% nitpick. Reccing comments that are erroneous is essentially rewarding a bad thing. Yes; everyone makes mistakes and I'm not saying bad info makes one a bad person. That's why comments are to be evaluated on their content, not the personality behind them. I get that we all have people around here we especially like and tend to rec them all the time. And I know some diarists like to welcome people in and encourage participation.
That is all good and well, but when validation/personality-driven reccing leads to comments that are just plain wrong getting rec'd, it just ain't right.