Thank you. I did not get any warnings really on Physics and didn't troll anyone. He tends to suspend me and vagely tell me why after. I am suspended for low quality post on those sites. And again for editing those same questions. As I learn I see issue with many posts and only wish to make them better. Will I ever go back to the freedom as when I first started to move and participate after a suspension? After a year it is hard for me to remember what I edited or asked that got me suspended. I will not do anything in physics again until Acuriousmind is no longer moderator.

@Muze, just to clarify: your use of "he" in your comment suggests that you believe you have run up against some idiosyncrasy of a particular moderator on Physics. But that's not correct. Instead, your longstanding pattern of disregard for community norms and simple instructions has led to a coordinated decision by the entire Physics moderation team, with (as this answer illustrates) support from moderators on other sites.

@Muze It is also not the case that your current or previous suspension were entirely for low-quality contributions, as you are aware. We can discuss further if you change your mind and return to Physics next year.

@rob you could lift the suspension and talk now. I only up voted but because I tend to up vote often and this is my norm on every site. I know the rules on this now. If I want to up vote 9 posts of a user 50 or more posts it should not be considered target up voting just me being generous. The system allows 10 up votes before it is considered serial voting. astronomy.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/455/…

Nope, I'm done. Enjoy the rest of 2019.

@Muze: 10 votes is definitely not some sort of guaranteed minimum serial-voting threshold. The script can and will fire on much smaller quantities in certain circumstances, and moderators can as well. Basically, there is no acceptable level of targeted or serial voting. There's only cases where insufficient evidence is available to prove the invalid voting.

@Muze Just because the system lets you do something doesn't mean that you're allowed to do it. To apply your arguments would be to say that you should not be arrested for shoplifting because you didn't trip the store's burglar alarm. The rule is that you should vote for the content, not the user; the fact that you voted based on the user is itself a rule violation, regardless of whether or not you trip the detection script. In other words, just because you didn't trip the burglar alarm doesn't mean you've gotten away scot-free from shoplifting.

@gparyani not the same but I understand,

@NathanTuggy 10 up votes to be clear. I should not be suspended for up voting What does it matter really if I up vote all at one time or over time if I like most of the users posts. Even the post that are above my comprehension that show hard work to me is deserving of an up vote.

@Muze: As far as upvotes being suspension-worthy… what do you think voting rings rely on, and are punished for?

@NathanTuggy you mean a group of people all up voting each other while down voting everyone else into question bans while rewriting the post better for themselves? I don't do that.

@Muze: I didn't say you ran a voting ring. But you did say that upvotes aren't suspension-worthy. They are. One somewhat more serious example of why they are is voting rings. (I've never heard of a ring that made any attempt to downvote others into question or answer bans, or that made edits as part of their operations. The defining characteristic is use of upvotes to increase rep or avoid question bans in a group of connected accounts.)

@NathanTuggy My upvotes are not worthy of suspensions IMO. What if you are suspended for over all low quality posts then over time those posts get better then shouldn't the ban or strikes be retracted?

@Muze I just wanted to throw my hat in with the other mods--your actions on the site have been one of the most taxing things on the mod workload. I've given you grace here (Space Exploration) as I don't know the details of what happened on other sites, but your pattern over time has not been great. I don't know if you have memory issues or are being intentionally obtuse, but yes we really do expect you to cease errant behavior addressed in repeated reminders of past years.

This should not be a difficult task, and if it is I'm not sure that SE is right for you.

@called2voyage I do have some memory issues maybe. I will so down and think more before posting. I really don't want to push any more for change, moderators do need the ability to trigger question, edit,answer, and other system triggered stuff. I have stopped my voting pattern that was my own and not for gain,

stuff as in bans

Thank you

@called2voyage I will help more and spread out across the othe

r SE

@called2voyage I do see "creating work alot" would editing less help? What would you say I need to do less?

@Muze Is there anyone who can proofread your posts before you post them on Stack Exchange? Someone who might also be able to say, "I'm not sure this is really a good question"?

@called2voyage yes there is a Sandbox in world-building and I will ask the moderator there if it would be okay for me to build my questions there

I meant somebody you know personally.

@called2voyage Yes I was hoping that may be a universal sandbox can be created for people like me or anyone for that matter. I did address this in Area 51 a couple times and was rejected. I have a hard time with grammar but I am getting better thanks to SE. I will try finding a grammar program of some type and give that a try before my next question. I want my next question to be perfect.