For what it may help here, I agree of course with your answer : quoting/citing is distinct from plagiarism. It can be called "site rules" or anything else but not plagiarism. The whole point of my post was to get the moderators to get their terms straight and also to get their act together, punishing me and others while a moderator has with total impunity a hundred times more such answers than anyone else.

@Mokubai: I don't see a big conflict. "Often" is not the same as "always", leaving room for some moderator appreciation. It might be taken to relate to the user using quoting too often. SE has exactly the same sentence but its interpretation is evidently different (as in my above link which could be adopted by SU). This interpretation is purely up to the moderators and doesn't need a Meta decision (it was so on SO).

@Mokubai: Constructive idea: Align SU with the SO policy - Are "quote-only" answers allowed? : Occasional quoting is suffered, quoting as principal method is not. This will reduce tensions with users (see above comment by user Vomit IT). Only answer my comment if you're considering this seriously.

@Ramhound: I stopped being worried about downvotes a long time ago, if they come without a comment that makes me doubt the correctness or relevancy of my answer. I will delete an answer if I'm convinced it's unfixable or the context is too painful, I don't need a downvote for that.

@Mokubai: My position exactly, and exactly what I'm trying to achieve here (while possibly being misunderstood) - the moderator shouldn't decide on plagiarism. No more messages.

@Ramhound: Untrue. I delete an answer only if it's proven wrong or I have misunderstood the question or if interfacing with the poster becomes too painful. I leave downvoted answers without deleting them if I don't see them as wrong. You may check if you like.

@Ramhound: With "fully accredited" I mean that full credit was given to the author. For a book this would be author name, book name, and page number. For an internet post/article this would be at least a link. I can make the wording more specific if you feel it necessary. And I promised you the links to my deleted answers, but I can find only one, the other three have disappeared from my deleted answers list, maybe undeleted. For the moment, it seems that I was suspended for one quote-only answer.

@Mokubai: Last message. I see the position of the moderators here as untenable. You're saying in effect: There are a hell of a lot of quote-only answers on SU, but we reserve ourselves the right to select a small number of them, declare them as plagiarism and punish the user, according to criteria that we won't share, and we won't accept complaints. Is that reasonable or a position that is possible to defend?

@JourneymanGeek: Question : How many users have you suspended for plagiarism because of quote-only answers? (I mean, besides me). Some examples would be good.

@Mokubai: What do the moderators want? Don't you think that in view of the large number of quote-only answers, calling it plagiarism is de-facto impossible?

Not so - you're ignoring the fact that my proposition has nothing to do with me and is only future-looking. It's motivated by a personal event, cert, but its aim is to modify site rules to set quote-only answers as acceptable. What I stretch is the fact that, de facto, quote-only answers exist in large numbers on SU, so calling then plagiarism is just ridiculous.

... Which leaves still open my above proposition, which seems to be totally ignored in all of this.

@Mokubai: You're missing the point, although I can see it's easy to think so. I'm saying constructively that there is nothing wrong with a quote-only answer if it fully answers the question. I'm repeating that I like the answers by DavidPostill and wish him only good. The format of an answer is immaterial, and using it as the main criteria in deleting and suspending is just wrong. Yes, I'm personally angry because it happened to me, but advising me to forgive and forget just leaves the question open. I think you should look at it in a more general manner than just my personal motives.

... With so many quote-only answers on SU, I think that de-facto, the definition of quote-only answers as plagiarism should be avoided. This is the main purpose of my post.

@Mokubai: This is a good advice, but doesn't answer what happened. I can't in all honesty ignore the fact that SU has unclear rules that are being applied in a selective manner. The example of a moderator (a good moderator) that has a hundred times more quote-only answers than me still sticks in my throat. I think that the moderators should be more open to criticism and to admitting to error. Practically, I think that moderator Journeyman Geek should apologize, but I don't think this is ever going to happen.

@Ramhound: Yes, as I said there's some problem with the indexes of later years, where I get many wrong pointers to answers that are not by DavidPostill. The URLs should be by ascending date order and the latest is from 2020. I'm sure I have seen as many such answers of his in the last years, but the query doesn't give them. Actually, it's because I have seen these answers by DavidPostill that I dared write my 4 answers. It's late here, so I'll add links to my 4 deleted answers tomorrow.

I have now added some URLs to my answer. I wait to see how many of them you will delete as "low quality". Would you accuse your fellow moderator of plagiarism?

@Ramhound: No problem, I have added one small list to my answer.