It's true that down-voting is a form of information, in some contexts. I could even say "Who wants tacos today? Up-vote if yes, down-vote if no", and it could be fully friendly. It is just that here, in this situation, I didn't get it.

Ofc it's this huge tangent from the OP b/c originally there was just a single down-vote, and I was curious if I were missing something wrt DDG, but it sounds like not, just "sometimes people prefer to use Google". Which sounds like it would apply to every non-Google suggestion though?

And then my asking that meta-question quadrupled the number of down-votes - probably like you said, people consider this tangent not relevant to the OP - but at least as a result of it all I know I am not missing anything important... that anyone is willing to write out:-D. Which seems important, crucial even, info for OP and others to have? About the down-sides to DDG I mean.

But look how many words and messages we had to use and even number of respondents had to participate just to dig out that truth. Even a comment like "you suck, nerd!" - aside from its unfriendliness & irrelevance to the discussion - does act to disambiguate the reasoning behind a down-vote, whereas simply down-voting with no explanation sends a confusing signal with no clear interpretation (except perhaps in the mind of the sender).

This is why I may pile on the downvotes, to signal agreement, but if I am the first to take that initiative, I do at least take the time to reply so they aren't left wondering why.

Remember the human, and all of that:-).