If I recall correctly, that was in the sense of a comment being factually incorrect, or so far off-base as to represent a damaging assertion. That is, the need to signal to a reader would outweigh the desire to avoid downvoting based on disagreement.

In this case, civilian presented interesting points regarding independent accomplishment and his own feelings of disenfranchisement. I can't come up with a very good explanation for a downvote.

'Wrong' in that it's like punching someone you disagree with as opposed to shaking his hand if you agree with them when you could have just voiced your thoughts. I presume pg says its fine because it'll mean less flamey comments.