Questions to the moderators

Question

This post is addressed at the moderators.

In my 11 years on SU I have been suspended two times for one week at a time, for reasons that still today leave me perplexed.

My first suspension was when I posted a quote-only answer. This was defined by a moderator as ... "plagiarism" (for an accredited quote?). There are hundreds of quote-only answers on SU for which I suspect no one was ever suspended, even some recent ones by moderators ...

In one message addressed to me by a moderator, there is perhaps a hint:

As a high reputation user - for that matter, the highest reputation user on the site your actions set an example for the other users on the site.

Reputation adds to my visibility on SU, but it seems like it also attracts sanctions.

My second suspension happened just now, and is for voting the migration of a post to the wrong SE site. Unlike the other suspensions, the moderator has chosen to stay anonymous (why?). It anyway needed 4 more identical votes to have any effect, which didn't happen. Why such an extreme sanction for an action that didn't matter is beyond my understanding, unless the highest-reputed user is not allowed any mistake?

I would like to ask the moderators to please answer my following questions:

1. How many users or moderators on SU were suspended for a week because of a quote-only answer?
2. How many users on SU were suspended for a week because of a wrong close-migrate vote?
3. Can just any action of myself (or others) be used as a reason for immediate suspension if a moderator disagrees with it, even if done in good faith? No rules apply?
4. Why are immediate suspensions done without warning for rules that were never published in the Help and that in fact no one is aware that they exist, such as sanctions for wrong votes?
5. Before immediate suspension, isn't a prior warning more in the spirit of "be nice"? Shouldn't education be preferable to sanctions?
6. Why in SU are the names of moderators listed for all their actions, except for suspensions?

(Please don't mention my reputation in your answer - reputation does not confer any super-geek powers or abilities.)

I am a very active member of SU, but there is a problem with that, if SU has become a place where "Anything you do, can, and may be used against you".

I figure I will receive some negative answers and hear some bad things about myself, but I'm willing to suffer through it in the hope of getting some meaningful answers for my above questions.

EDIT : I understand that I'll not be getting any answers, but I will keep on protesting for being suspended for reasons that I still have difficulty in believing that anyone could be suspended for.

Although I have asked that my reputation not be the base for an answer, this (only) moderator continues with his these that justifies all actions: As the highest-reputation user I should serve as a shining example, and he has taken upon himself the task of beating me into perfection.

I don't agree - everyone should be equal before the law, even on SU. Reputation does not make me, or anyone, into more than human. Besides, this is a really lousy excuse for his actions.

Answer 1

Reviewing your history

In my 11 years on SU I have been suspended three times for one week at a time, for reasons that still today leave me perplexed.

This is incorrect, there have been 2 suspensions and 4 mod messages without suspensions. Where possible, these mod messages are designed to try to address some form of negative behaviour and go into details. Both suspensions were standard mod messages, and are covered in the rules. So we certainly do try to remind you when we feel you've fallen short of the standards we expect.

And well, as a high rep user myself, I feel that part of my obligation to the community goes beyond simply accumulating reputation. I try to set a good example, and mentor and help users.

Part of this comes with using the powers you have as a high reputation user responsibly - This of course includes posting quality answers, voting responsibly and so on.

So, we'll continue to remind you where needed about actions that concern us. We're not going to give you extra slack, or treat you more harshly simply because you're a high reputation user. We'll be disappointed if you don't live up to the expectations we have of our #1 user, and cheer you on when you do.

As far as we're concerned though, you get treated exactly the same.

Answer 2

I have had issues here too and have learned something from reading Meta posts about suspensions such as this. Let me put my two cents.

You have been suspended without warning for making one mistake. Alright, it was said you have been suspended and warned in the past, however those were separate events that had nothing to do with this one mistake. How can I know this? I cannot. This is simply applying the presumption of innocence. But to weight to this impression, Gparyani has accurately asked the moderator:

The user was (in your opinion validly) suspended for casting an incorrect migration close vote. Since you didn't mention so in your answer, were there other concerns at play, other than the incorrect close vote, which led to the suspension?

but had no reply.

It looks like at Super User the bar is set too high on contributors. To be honest, I like much better the opposite metaphor, that the bar is set too low, low enough that it is all too easy to overlook it and trip despite one's best efforts.

I'm sorry to hear the treatment you receive. Your punishment was clearly excessive. I was going to suggest you to settle in some other community, but peeking into your profile, it is evident that the subjects you like best are mostly only on-topic at Super User. So my suggestion is: Keep answering and helping users that come by, but stop contributing to review queues. It is an horrible feeling to try to help and be chastised. Spare yourself of that feeling.