Clarification of rules and penalizations

[1Cap]

I have no doubt that I should not have been punished with 20% warning level.
I am using myself as an example. But it could be anyone else.
My post was not abusive. At most it may have been inconclusive.
But the moderator imposed punishment without wondering exactly what I meant. This is abuse. He did it because he can. Is it?

Just to clarify your issue once again like RR has done in a few posts before so we can put a halt already on your grudge. Yes, your post was not abusive; however it was off-topic and did not have relation with the purpose of the thread, like RR already said,he even warned everyone before you posted that any off-topic post would be as a consequence warned, which is what happened to you. Now that this is made clear, please stop bringing up this specific issue you have in this thread. We are attempting to all speak in a broad and general idea of this forum's moderation, not your or anyone else's personal case.

The mods have no reason why they would abuse or fool around with the warnings just for fun or personal issues. The mods' job at the end of the day is simply to help get the forums clean and flowing to make it better and easier for everyone. I know the mods and I know for a fact none of them would warn or ban someone because they find it fun or like you said, "because they can".

I received this warning:

"Attacking another forum user after warned. (+2 points)
for post: RE: FuRy - 23 Jul 12, 12:50AM 21 Sep 12, 12:50AM Ronald_Reagan"

I was not punished for being off-topic.
I do not understand this kind of moderation fails ...