I understand. At least it kind of answers some of my question, thanks.

Oh, I get that. But my question is related to this specific instance in the linked question. I mean, you can see it's not a bad answer, and the OP even stated it fixed the issue. If it were a poor answer, then I would understand the downvote, and edit/remove accordingly. But it isn't. Is it?

So what you're saying is that the system is open to abuse? I mean, for a low rep user, if there was enough disagreement, you could have one answer literally destroy all of your reputation.

Ouch. That seems counter productive. If the answer cannot be removed, shouldn't voting on it also be disabled after it's been accepted?