Because of a comment I recently had a look at some FAQs in the "help" section and stumbled upon this post about review suspensions. It states the following:
Review suspensions are not penalties, but temporary holds on your reviewing privilege. The purpose of this is to give you time to learn more about how to review correctly. Poor reviews negatively affect the community and the site’s content. If you take incorrect action on multiple tasks, your reviewing privilege may be temporarily suspended and you won’t have access to the Review Queues during this time period.
So I wonder what constitutes a "poor review" that would end up getting a user suspended from reviewing. From how I understand reviewing, is is quite often subjective (IMO) and I would not necessarily consider someone who votes differently from myself to have voted wrong or to have poorly reviewed. Because very often, voting is not straightforward and opinion based, or hinging on small details. Also, in the overwhelming majority of voting, voters just use a preexisting voting button, making it hard to judge if someone just has a different opinion than other voters or if they really don't know what they are doing or being destructive on purpose.
So I am seriously interested in what makes a review a poor one and how this is judged. To me this feels like almost impossible to do. Or is this a remnant from earlier times and not really enforced anymore?