This post is addressed at the moderators.

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.

My first suspension was for reviewing and accepting a new tag description that a moderator found to be insufficient. On Meta I managed to get an admission from him that maybe he shouldn't have gone for a suspension, although this was in a comment below an answer that said the opposite.

Things became more difficult when I achieved the highest reputation on SU.

My second 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 third 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.