As it is stated in community FAQ:
When a single user continually votes (up or down) on many of your posts within a short period of time, the system considers these votes to be invalid and removes them. This could happen for a variety of reasons, such as a user finding a user's great answer and visiting all of their posts to upvote them, or a user getting into an argument with another user and downvoting their posts indiscriminately in revenge. No matter the cause, this sort of systematic targeted voting is not considered normal behavior and the system will not allow it.
If such a voting pattern continues to happen between two users mutually or from one user towards another, or otherwise falls outside of normal voting patterns, moderators and/or developers may investigate the matter; intentionally voting merely to reduce or inflate another user's reputation is considered abuse.
But what if a user that has moderator role sees that there is systematic targeted upvoting towards them?
On one hand if a system does not correct the reputation then it might be a normal voting pattern, but on the other hand automated algorithm might not always be effective. More over the moderator role puts extended responsibility to a person to maintain community principles and watch the community rules.
So how do you, folks, think what should a hypothetical moderator do in that case from moderation ethic stand point?
