Keep in mind that this is the only meta in the entire network that has reputation. Meta is normally attached to a specific site, where reputation is inherited from the parent site and votes on meta affect nothing but the post's score. Most people wind up on per-site metas where a lot of what you talk about is simply irrelevant.

I wasn’t even aware site-specific metas were a thing. Interesting. Do people vote on feature requests the same way in those metas, such that their rep for the associated site is affected? If so, it seems like they would suffer the same problem, but with potential negative consequences that would bother the asker even more, since it’s their non-meta rep.

@JakeRobb On site-specific metas, votes don't affect rep at all. (Rep effectively doesn't exist on those; privileges are determined by rep on the non-meta site.) So voting on ideas and proposals to show "I like this" and "I don't like this" is standard, in my experience.

Wow, a downvote already? This isn’t a feature request, so that means someone thinks I didn’t do my research, I wasn’t clear, and that being a more welcoming place for enthusiastic new members would not be a useful improvement? Please, explain.

@Draconis thanks, that makes sense. It brings to mind another solution: one’s rep on Meta (for determining privileges) could be the sum (or mean, median, min, max — whatever) of the user’s reps on all other communities in which they’re a member, such that votes don’t affect that either.

@JakeRobb A guess: They disagree that downvotes are hurting the community.

@Daedalus would that be correct usage of a downvote in Meta?

@JakeRobb There is no "correct usage"; people downvote as they please. Voting is not regulated to such strict standards, aside from the general rules to not target a person, but to gauge content only.

Then why does the Help have guidelines for how voting should be used, both on and off Meta? Why are there tooltips?

@JakeRobb The tooltip is to help people understand a possible reason their content may have been downvoted. The help center(not guidelines) that says that voting is different on meta, is again, an explanation to help people understand a possible reason their content was voted on in the way it was voted on. Neither the tooltip, nor the help center specify rules on how downvotes are used beyond not voting on people, and not serially voting.

Downvoting is completely anonymous and requires no explanation; there are no rules that have to be followed. Any tooltips or other guidelines are merely suggestions. The accepted culture of downvotes on meta is to downvote if you disagree, and upvote if you agree. There might be a valid request to change the tooltip on meta, but criticizing the established culture isn't going to get you very far. I think most people will think the statement in this question's title is false. On meta, upvoting and downvoting based on agreement or disagreement with a question is the established practice.

You have my upvote, as one who's once lost a privilege for expressing an unpopular viewpoint. I definitely believe that people shouldn't be forced to lose reputation just for that. It doesn't mean that you're less trusted by the community, have worse communication skills, or that your posts are of lower quality or less relevant (in the words of the rep league page). However, this question has already been addressed, and the top answer to Why does Meta Stack Exchange have reputation? is relevant here.

If you aren't even aware that per-site metas are thing, I'd say that's a clear indication your research is lacking.

@JakeRobb That topic was already discussed ad nauseam here. In this post both DV reasons apply well: Lack of research and disagreement.

Well, the title makes a claim that is inaccurate. I don't feel hurt by meta downvotes. I feel a little sad, on occasion, when my awesomely marvellous suggestions are rejected, but I do not claim to speak for any 'community' if I disagree with something.

Four duplicates and the comment "I wasn’t even aware site-specific metas were a thing." means the downvote tooltip applies to this question. It is not useful and shows little research effort.

This post has nothing to do with site-specific metas. Why does my lack of awareness indicate little research? Must I be familiar with the entire SE universe before starting a discussion about Meta on Meta? As for the four "duplicates": #1 isn't about SO, not Meta, #2 is a decade-old, popular, unimplemented feature request which I linked, and #s 3 and 4 only became relevant as duplicates after some discussion in the comments.

All four are certainly related, and contain useful context, but duplicates they are clearly not. Besides, three of them are from a decade ago. Is Meta completely incapable of evolving over time, such that there is zero value in discussing something again?

@MartinJames one need not hurt the feelings of every single member of the community in order to be bad for the community overall. It's nice that you don't feel bad, but I do, and I have found numerous examples of others who have felt the same way going back a decade and then some.

How do I participate in Meta and not die trying?

@rene thank you for actually being helpful. I've edited my question -- is this better? 😉

@JakeRobb When you edit a closed question, it's entered into the reopen queue. You have thus probably wasted your chance to get this question reopened by using that edit to edit in a joke. Next time, instead of leaving the "not a duplicate" reasoning in a transient comment, edit it into the question instead.

@Daedalus I have no hope for this question, nor much for my involvement in Meta without some changes. I tried talking about those changes and was shouted down; now I'm done. Just having some parting fun. I did not know that editing would put it back in the reopen queue; apologies if I wasted your time.

@JakeRobb - The fact you did not understand that the first edit would automatically place your question in the reopen queue is understandable. However, what cannot be explained, is the reason you added the joke at all.

@Ramhound No, that can absolutely be explained. rene's link recommended it: "When in doubt... Waffles, ponies, unicorns and bacon are good fallback subjects when you have nothing else to say. When adding images to your questions, make sure to highlight important features using freehand circles"

I've never used SE chat before. Neat.