My guess was based on trying to put myself in the mindset of who was downvoting you and assume they were rational and had a reason. That was my best hypothesis based on that assumption and it could be wrong as many hypotheses turn out to be.

Yes, "should be mentioned" would be preferred but it's not a law or requirement. I just saw @iqraali88's reply a few minutes ago to this post and that would be just as likely a hypothesis. The fact that HiveWatchers stated in a follow up reply that your account has been blacklisted should have been a clue to you. There was little chance that @traciyork would know that you were the admin of a community you copied from because you never quoted, attributed, or gave an indication but nonetheless the content posted was recycled and in my opinion that seems legitimate.

Sorry I can't be more on your side but I have to go with the evidence and the nature of what the Hive blockchain is. Maybe you should have been given more explicit warning but I can also understand why someone would think that your account had been around long enough to have known better and didn't cut you the same slack that they would have for a new member.