We've had the argument whereby comments on down votes are not such a good idea, but how about making the DV'er's user name publicly available. anonymous down voting belongs to the dark ages.
I have never seen anyone complain about anonymous up votes. That is most likely because the user feels validated/rewarded/(insert positive here.) However, there are very many complaints about anonymous down votes.
Users often state that explanations of down votes will help them learn to post better questions/answers, and this may very well be true. However, much more often the user feels unjustly attacked. After a few down votes, some believe they are being serially down voted. Few people honestly want to hear that their post is simply not helpful, useful, poorly researched, incorrect, or any other legitimate reason for a down vote. They want to argue with the down voter. This results in tedious comment wars.
A better way to deal with unwanted down votes is to improve the content of your posts. You will contribute more to the site, and the up votes will be a pleasant side-effect of posting instead of a bummer.
Finally, your answer to @curiousdannii's question (that you live on Mount Olympus), while amusing, indicates that you might enjoy hurling your thunderbolts at the down voter more than doing anything useful about the content they are down voting.
Answer, because I cannot yet comment. I'll work on that.
Why not limit down votes to -10 or so, and any beyond that don't affect the total. The OP gets the point that their post has been negatively received, but does not feel overwhelmed by "serial downvoting."
I agree with @medica in her second paragraph. Removing anonymity more often than not leads to arguments, not resolutions.