It seems possible that, for questions of marginal quality, users may be more inclined to downvote or vote to close questions from an asker with a low accept rate, rather than simply declining to answer the question. On the surface, this would seem to be unfair and ad hominem, since the decision isn't purely based on the merits and demerits of the question but also on metadata about the person asking it.
Has this happened? I am not positive, as I've seen a couple of edge-cases, but nothing that can absolutely confirm that this is happening.
More importantly, do we care? It's been said that downvotes are already used too sparingly, so perhaps when considering questions of marginal quality, the accept rate is actually the useful tool we need to distinguish between newcomers who deserve leniency and "Problematic Participants" who should know better by now.
UPDATE: Looking for lowest-voted questions seems to show some good candidates. Granted, each has other problems, but for the sake of argument I'd consider them merely questions of marginal quality, while still being passably on-topic. The downvotes seem to be related to the comments, which directly point out that the questioner's low accept rate indicates that they are not "engaged with the community":