Yes, @Videonauth: downvoting posts because of their author is just as discouraged as upvoting posts because of their author. Vote according to the quality and usefulness of the post, not your opinion of who wrote it. See also: meta.askubuntu.com/questions/3248/serial-downvoting-reversed

Being fair is impossible, but at least we can be objective - hence a system based on patterns.

No it doesn't, @Pilot6. Forgive me for not being too specific here, but... The detection is based on patterns of voting, not simply "X voted for Y too much". Invalidation once detected is currently somewhat more blunt, but the actual detection is quite conservative even with the corrections I've made.

Both. "Serial vote" always implies "targeted vote". Incidentally, we've kinda moved away from using "serial voting" in the UI because of this confusion.

Hard not to look like overkill when year(s) of corrections all get made in the span of a few hours I'm afraid. BTW, I didn't ignore downvotes with this - there are equivalent systems with equivalent flaws for serial downvoting, and votes missed there are being corrected as well.

Ok; you're five and I don't want you to spoil your supper, but there's cookies on the table for later. I point at them and tell you, "don't eat these cookies". So you go into the pantry and eat the rest of the package of cookies, because I didn't tell you not to eat those cookies. Here, we have a system that inadvertently said, "don't vote exactly like that" when it really meant, "don't vote for people, vote for posts".

I'm fine adding these, @Elder. I'll defer to the mod-team to sanity check 'em and let me know which ones are "ready" though. Particularly since one of those answers has like 50 tags in it.

Here you go, @Seth: meta.askubuntu.com/questions/15205/tracking-on-tag-warnings/‌​… - tl;dr: it probably helped a bit, but not a panacea.

Just to sanity-check: you're not running any filters or ad-blockers, are you?

Someone forgot to limit this to Stack Overflow.