I was reading an old answer by Jeff Atwood on Meta. It's a heavily downvoted answer and it's almost invisible due to the "blurring" applied to that post. In fact, an answer doesn't need too many downvotes but a net score of -3 is enough to get it blurred.
I have the habit of reading all comments if a particular answer is interesting to me in either way (strongly disagree/agree). But it's pretty annoying to read such an "invisible" post and more so for the comments as the font is small and blurring is applied to the comments as well.
What's the point of such blurring? Don't the votes serve the purpose to indicate that "this answer is very bad"?
I understand the purpose is to indicate future readers that "this answer is bad". But...
Aren't the number of downvotes and the post staying at the bottom enough to indicate readers that "this answer is considered as bad"? I don't see the point of blurring an answer when the downvotes indicate it's of poor quality and push it to the bottom. IMO, the blurring effect only serves to annoy the future readers.
A subjective/incorrect answer could easily (and quickly) get 3 downvotes on SO and yet I (probably others as well) want to read that post to see what's wrong or whether it's actually bad, etc.