I have created an entry for this room in the List of chatrooms on meta. I think it is an important room, so it should be mentioned.
OTOH it's mainly up to the mods to decide what should be mentioned there. (So far I have only included link to the post announcing that the room was created and copied the room description from that post.)
@SimplyBeautifulArt I checked it and didn't see anything actionable. I don't even have a suspect. 4 dvs in 2 days is just too little. The only suspicious thing in your recent rep history is the string of 8 upvotes on 8 distinct questions in a span of 7 minutes on Aug 12th. That is what targeted voting looks like. I am mildly surprised the invalidation script didn't catch it.
@MartinSleziak Not quite pertinent to this message, but IMHO if you want the question to be CW, it might make more sense to amalgamate all the different answers into a single one, and then CW that. That should prevent there being too many one-off answers, and be more in keeping with the nature of CW: answers which are contributed to and maintained by the community.
@arjafi Of course, I do not insist that the question has to be CW.
As you can see, three of the answers are "cummulative". (Area specific rooms, administrative rooms, study groups.)
Probably separate answers can also make sense since voting tells us a bit about the view on that room. (For example, we see that at least one user does not like the "searching" room.)
I decided to collect several rooms into the three answers mentioned above since posting a separate room would result in too many answers.
