Can it ever be justified in down voting a technically correct answer, or an answer with a minor error that can be corrected when brought to the attention of the person who answered the question. I reluctantly deleted an answer that was correct because it annoyed me seeing the down votes and felt quite angry when I was awarded a "peer pressure" badge.
There are many possible reasons for down-voting that have nothing to do with correctness in a narrow sense, including:
- DVer thinks the answer is too sloppy.
- DVer thinks the answer is too terse.
- DVer thinks the answer is redundant.
- DVer thinks the answer is too clumsy.
- DVer thinks the answer uses needlessly advanced tools.
Or, DVer thinks the question just should not be answered.
Thus, in short, yes it can be justified. Whether in some given case it is the best course of action is hard to tell in abstract, and opinions on that matter are quite mixed.
(Too long for a comment):
@quid "DVer thinks the answer is too sloppy, DVer thinks the answer is too terse, DVer thinks the answer is redundant." These are subjective reasons. What I'd like is objective reasons.
""DVer thinks the answer uses needlessly advanced tools." Yet if you surf this site, others have suggested that (something along the lines) "advanced answers provide food for thought for the person who asked the question and for others".
As far as homework question's go, I've noticed that these questions have in many cases been edited to make the question more sensible. Shouldn't they have been rejected at this stage? Shouldn't homework questions be automatically reviewed and rejected (if necessary) before hand? As well, I've been criticised about answering questions where someone else has thought there wasn't enough effort. When I pointed out why I thought some effort had been made, these haven't been answered.