4 ms·

A warning would have been absolutely sufficient, at most a very short term ban but given there was no harm being done currently and the rules weren't even clear

A warning would have been absolutely sufficient, at most a very short term ban but given there was no harm being done currently and the rules weren't even clear no ban is justified. I am aware of vote fraud and it's ok that SO warns/suspends if one engages in it. In this case it arguably does. However it needs to be a proportionate response to the action, and not done as retaliation. I'm also a fairly high reputation SO contributor (in current rankings top 150).

fabian2k 2y ago
This specific user has a very long history on SO and the rest of the network. You have to assume that this history might have played a part in the decision to suspend instead of only warning.
- DangitBobby 2y ago
  No real reason to assume that.
  - fabian2k 2y ago
    1 year suspensions are not handed out for first offenses. The guidelines for mods are to give escalating suspensions for 7/30/365 days, so this is most likely at least the third suspension for this user.
    - croemer 2y ago
      This case could be different. Do you know he was suspended before? It makes sense that they'd want to ban him for a year if this is retribution. It all checks out. The email doesn't mention a previous ban which I'd expect to be mentioned if it was a factor.
      - fabian2k 2y ago
        This specific user has been suspended multiple times on different sites of the SE network. I don't know exactly how often.
    - immibis 2y ago
      I received a 1 year suspension on Meta for: * I asked a question about a moderation policy (are we allowed to delete comments? here are two conflicting sources. Which one is correct?) * A moderator requested an edit in a comment, then shortly after, deleted it due to not having that edit. * Since there's no way to edit a deleted question, I posted it again with the edit. I think the ban was actually for questioning SE's inconsistency. Like all dictatorships, they punish you for not obeying in advance.

fabian2k 2y ago

This specific user has a very long history on SO and the rest of the network. You have to assume that this history might have played a part in the decision to suspend instead of only warning.

DangitBobby 2y ago
No real reason to assume that.
- fabian2k 2y ago
  1 year suspensions are not handed out for first offenses. The guidelines for mods are to give escalating suspensions for 7/30/365 days, so this is most likely at least the third suspension for this user.
  - croemer 2y ago
    This case could be different. Do you know he was suspended before? It makes sense that they'd want to ban him for a year if this is retribution. It all checks out. The email doesn't mention a previous ban which I'd expect to be mentioned if it was a factor.
    - fabian2k 2y ago
      This specific user has been suspended multiple times on different sites of the SE network. I don't know exactly how often.
  - immibis 2y ago
    I received a 1 year suspension on Meta for: * I asked a question about a moderation policy (are we allowed to delete comments? here are two conflicting sources. Which one is correct?) * A moderator requested an edit in a comment, then shortly after, deleted it due to not having that edit. * Since there's no way to edit a deleted question, I posted it again with the edit. I think the ban was actually for questioning SE's inconsistency. Like all dictatorships, they punish you for not obeying in advance.