I'm not good at being synthetic.
This tool for checking the low quality is indeed really a great tool. When it went out there was no notice of a possible ban. I was critic about that and I'm happy that a warning message was added.
I love this community, I love the enthusiasm of his members. But sometime it's really hard to force someone to do what we think is the best.
The community has already changed his mind and added a warning message. I love it. But I've seen it appearing after just a few questions which are even not so terrible.
On other sites trolls get banned. Here it's more strict and I like it. But.. which is the best threshold? It's very nice to warn people, and I don't know if I'm really near to a ban. But if I'm I wonder if this is the best one.
I don't expect a changement, I want only to signal that it seems excessive to be banned with a few questions some of which also got answered. People like Dale Carnegie clarified that it's not so easy to force people to do what we want by cohercitive methods. The reactions we get is often really different from what we expect. Also, something which works may not work when lead to an excess (the example may look weird, but think to Anorexia. Getting slimmer is effective to get some objective at the beginning, but when it comes to an extreme stuff changes and other problems get more important.)
Is it really needed to be so harsh to ban users for 2 downvoted questions and few more? Has it been checked that it's leading to what the community wants?
Thanks for listening to me.