In Jeff's Penalty box blog: he listed reasons for getting suspended:
No effort to learn and improve over time
- This user does not put reasonable effort into the questions they ask of the community.
- There is little or no evidence of this user learning over time, either in the topic itself or in the community norms on the site.
- This user intentionally spams the site with the same question or very similar questions, over and over.
- The user never gives anything back to the community, but only takes.
What is the criteria for "The user never gives anything back to the community, but only takes."? Does a user with 1785 questions and 7 answers(non of them have positive rating, and two negative) fit to that definition?
I remember I saw a user with 0 answer being suspened, but does really answering one answer with negative rating save him?
I didn't linked to that user profile because it's not personally against him, but a hint: this is the user with the most questions in SO.