<p>I stumbled upon a user with a record of popular and interesting questions to have been suspended because of low-quality posts for a year.</p>
<p>I find this drastic, in particular in view of the user's previous (imho) quite valuable activity. I wonder whether such suspensions are made by the system based on the mere number of closed or deleted posts?</p>
<p>Should all users be treated the same way, irrespective of their previous contributions? Suspension can feel as a very aggressive sanction, in particular as it is publicly visible and the user's rep is shown as 1. This would not make much of a difference for a low rep spammer or a beginner, but for a loyal contributor it must be very frustrating.</p>
<p>Have attempts been made to introduce some less fierce sanctions, such as limiting the number of allowed posts per week/month tacitly for a while, and allowing mods to modify the sanction for low quality posts on a per case basis? Would this be feasible? What do you think?</p>
<p>Edit: I came to the conclusion that a suspension can also be helpful when someone has got addicted to the site and started wild posting.</p>
